ready to run, page-73

One can argue the toss about fundamentals and so forth, but it's mathematically impossible for a stock to do well unless it's price moves above the sorts of moving averages shown in those charts.

2003 showed, as I've reflected upon in GIP posts before, that for most penny dreadfuls, a weekly chart set up like BGS had a few months ago is almost necessary, for a stock to get going properly. The two key factors are:
- a tripling of volume compared to the weekly average for the previous 52 weeks
- a move above the simple moving average (9 or 12 on a weekly chart will generally do - an accompanying ABC formation is usually helpful too).

Traditionally, things move unusually slowly in GIPsland, so a monthly chart is generally more appropriate, as it is for blue chips (but for which volume is not a key factor). When things get really hot (which can sometimes happen in a moment eg. GIP in 2002, but more normally after a long wind up such as in 1999 through 2000), moving over to a daily chart for smaller stocks is generally more useful. When market conditions change dramatically, eyeballing these three timeframes for a stock can quickly show, in the great majority of cases, which is most appropriate to use. As always, what the market and sector are doing (in which a stock belongs), are very important too, for as many studies have shown, the great majority of stocks don't do well unless these two things are also doing well. GIP strikes out in all ways at the moment, which underlies why the share price is still declining.