RYOU isn't a very good TW stock because the downtrending base isn't long enough. And the entire company doesn't have a very long history.

A beginner TW trader ought to look for multiple year quiet bases. These type of downtrending bases are too tricky.

I wouldn't think any TW trader would currently be in RYOU.

my chart shows a beautifully 9 year downtrend, just about 10 degrees, so lower than TW expected 45 degree angle. The volume is diminishing starting in 2000 and 2001/

Dot:

Online charting services show the RYOU chart differently. Yahoo shows activity back through 1990 (http://finance.yahoo.com/q?s=RYOU&d=c&k=c1&a=v&p=s&t=my&l=off&z=m&q=b), but barchart.com and bigcharts.com show history only through 1999.

My guess is that the latter sites do not chart history pre-reverse splits (which occurred for RYOU on 3/15/99). The extra history does indeed add perspective to the chart. I don't have much experience trading TW picks following reverse splits, but the fact that RYOU went through one and the horrific earnings posted in the late '90s (-15.38 eps in '98) would make me more than a little cautious on this one.

My 2¢.

I am using the US chart book from KR. The reverse split doesn't concern me as much as the -15.38 earnings reported in 98. My chart shows from 1987. I have found sometimes that the low $ value charts aren't always in full. Something my sister and I ran across last year. the book comes in handy for this reason.

In 87 they had earning of -29.55 I am sure the chart was modified because of the reverse split but the $ read this $84 with the division of 3 would be $28 a share. The stock then dropped in a year and had a steady increase for three, but in the fourth year from that negative earnings it went to $48 divided by 3 would have been $16, that is where the 9 year downtrend starts this time.

Now we are starting the fourth year from the negative earnings posted in 98. I have found it easy to follow a stock prices and uptrends from previously posted charts of similar or the same chart. My experience...

Thanks for the input.
Dot