#sequent
Positional trade
Stock is back in the Triangle
Breakout above 285 levels
We may see 320/340 levels
Positional targets are for 500+ in next 6 months
@drprashantmish6
@unseenvalue
@soicfinance
More from The Man Who Never Shorts 🌟
More from Sequent
Having multiple facilities accredited with certifications from the best authorities from globe is a hidden moat in itself... 10-20% pop and then retracement should not shake confidence... Business focus and longevity should build conviction
— Harinder S Nanda (@harindersnanda) July 14, 2021
\U0001f436\U0001f431\U0001f434\U0001f42e\U0001f437\U0001f411@unseenvalue @soicfinance
Market is short sighted and loves to buy high and sell low
Sequent is a long gestation stock, it won't deliver it's real earnings until FY23-25
Not suitable investment for those who want 100% return/yr
@itsTarH hey Tariq, any idea why is Sequent falling?
— Vivek (@pa_stock) September 27, 2021
https://t.co/7ytUeSd7gg
Don't expect the earnings to go anywhere till FY23.
— Tar \u26a1 (@itsTarH) August 10, 2021
Real growth will only come post FY24.
I expect the stock to either correct or stay muted till then. https://t.co/lUQfzxojTO
You May Also Like
A small tribute/gift to members
Screeners
technical screeners - intraday and positional both
before proceeding - i have helped you , can i ask you so that it can help someone else too
thank you
positional one
run - find #stock - draw chart - find levels
1- Stocks closing daily 2% up from 5 days
https://t.co/gTZrYY3Nht
2- Weekly breakout
https://t.co/1f4ahEolYB
3- Breakouts in short term
https://t.co/BI4h0CdgO2
4- Bullish from last 5
intraday screeners
5- 15 minute Stock Breakouts
https://t.co/9eAo82iuNv
6- Intraday Buying seen in the past 15 minutes
https://t.co/XqAJKhLB5G
7- Stocks trading near day's high on 5 min chart with volume BO intraday
https://t.co/flHmm6QXmo
Thank you
Imagine for a moment the most obscurantist, jargon-filled, po-mo article the politically correct academy might produce. Pure SJW nonsense. Got it? Chances are you're imagining something like the infamous "Feminist Glaciology" article from a few years back.https://t.co/NRaWNREBvR pic.twitter.com/qtSFBYY80S
— Jeffrey Sachs (@JeffreyASachs) October 13, 2018
The article is, at heart, deeply weird, even essentialist. Here, for example, is the claim that proposing climate engineering is a "man" thing. Also a "man" thing: attempting to get distance from a topic, approaching it in a disinterested fashion.
Also a "man" thing—physical courage. (I guess, not quite: physical courage "co-constitutes" masculinist glaciology along with nationalism and colonialism.)
There's criticism of a New York Times article that talks about glaciology adventures, which makes a similar point.
At the heart of this chunk is the claim that glaciology excludes women because of a narrative of scientific objectivity and physical adventure. This is a strong claim! It's not enough to say, hey, sure, sounds good. Is it true?