The General may have mentioned, in the past, the rule promulgated by (purported master) T/A, Victor Sperando.
Sperando has stated, that when a stock's 10-Week MA (the General doesn't know if that's a "simple" or an "exponential" MA) crosses ABOVE its 30-Week MA, AND BOTH MAs ARE ASCENDING at the time the 'crossing' takes place, that's a technical BUY!! signal.
The General is assuming (although he doesn't know it for a fact) that the converse is equally valid. That when a 10-Week MA crosses BELOW its 30-Week MA, and BOTH MAs ARE DESCENDING at the time of the crossing, that that would be a technical SELL!! signal.
The General is unaware of a source on-line that provides 10-Week and 30-Week MAs, whether "simple" or "exponential."
He does, however, know of a web site that will provide daily "exponential" MAs of any whole number of days that the requester desires. That site is AskResearch.com.
If we can accept the 50-Day EMA (50 EMA) as a substitute for the 10-Week EMA, and the 150-Day EMA (150 EMA) as a proxy for the 30-Week EMA, then the General has been recording that data along with the 200 EMA and the 50 & 200-Day "simple" MAs (50 DMA & 200 DMA) to be found on a stock's "Statistics" page, here on the Y!-F quote site.
As for CXW, at the present time, ALL 5 of the above mentioned Daily MAs have crested and are heading downhill. Since the Sperando 'crossings' concern the "50" & the "150" EMAs, the General will just cite their values & relative spacings.
The 50 EMA crested on 2/08/05 at a value of 40.11. On 2/08/05, the 150 EMA was still ascending and its value was then 38.51, so the "50" was +1.60 points above the "150."
The "150" crested on 2/17/05 at a value of 38.70 while the then descending "50" stood @ 39.87, a superiority of + 1.17 points.
As of yesterday, 2/25/05, the both of them now descending, the "50" is @ 39.49 and the "150" is @ 38.49. The 50 EMA's 'superiority' has now narrowed to exactly 1.00 point.
It is evident that unless there's a reversal in direction for CXW's tracking, it is only a matter of time before the crossing of the 50 EMA below the 150 EMA takes place.
You know that honesty and forthrightness will only get you so far in this world, MK.
The nicster spent a career in the political arena and couldn't seem to absorb that lesson. That's the REAL reason the 'idealistic' little monger is residing in that empty Sears freezer carton under that bridge abutment. The misfortunes that befell CCA & PZN had little to do with it.
The General would like to believe that today's public announcement about the likely mothballing of the company's Otter Creek facility (which, it figures, will negatively impact FY05's bottom line to the tune of 5�), is the fundamental basis for CXW's price weakness since the beginning of the year (or especially over the past 5 weeks), but the continued deterioration in its industry's group relative price strength (GRPS) says that "'taint so McGhee."
While today's IBD ranks the Commercial Services-Security/Safety (CS-S/S) group 43rd out of its 197 groupings (that's down from 34th place a week prior), CXW carries an A/D (Accumulation/Distribution) rating of 'D-' and CRN (which hasn't announced any facility's mothballing and a commensurate hit to its earnings) has an A/D rating of 'D'.
That's more than a mite inconsistent with a GRPS rating that's currently letter designated as an 'A-' but which, numerically, should be no better than a 'B+'.
The princess has promulgated a more likely fundamental-based explanation here.
Hopefully, Otter Creek's mothballing isn't symptomatic of the "tip of the iceberg."