– TABELL'S MARKET LETTER 909 STATE ROAD, PRINCETON. NEW JERSEY OB540 DIVISION OF MEMBER NEW VORK. STOCk EXCHANGe, INC MEMBER AMERICAN STOCI( eXCHANGE – May 25, 1979 r – —- exhibited a certain fascination with the various benchmark high and low points which have been established by the various market averages. There are, for example, three major high points stretching back to last fall which, from a technical point of view, possess some significance. The first of these was the highest of the three, establishing the peak to date for the move from the lows of February, 1978. It was scored on September 8 last year at 907.74 in terms of the Dow Jones Industrials. The second peak of some importance was the initial recovery high of 859.75, attained on January 26 this year. Finally, the most recent benchmark peak must be assumed to be the closing high of 878.72, last April 10. Each of these highs has been followed by a low of equal significance. The September high was followed by a triple bottom in October-December with the lowest closing within this forma- tion at 785.26 in mid-November. January's rally was followed by a February low of 807.00. Most recently, the decline from the April high reached a closing bottom of 825.02 two weeks ago. The resulting formation, of course, is somewhat irregular. The three lows posted to date have taken place at successively higher figures. The last two short-term highs have been at higher peaks, but neither has yet equalled the peak of last September. We have dwelt in the past on what we conceive to be the implications of these levels for the general market. However, while the averages have been following their unexciting course, individual stocks and industry groups have been following divergent paths. We recently took the opportunity to examine the highs and lows for 96 Standard and Poors industry group in-, dices at points comparable to the highs and the lows for general market indicators. The table – 1979-,- – — and March to mid-April, 1979. Also displayed are the fall, 1978 lows, the January lows, and the lowest points attained for each index from April 18 to date. In terms of highs, six groups have qualified for membership in a market elite by posting successively higher peaks at each of the three benchmark points mentioned. These groups are Aluminum, Distillers, Copper, Electronics, Miscellaneous Metals, and Office Equipment. Five of the six have managed to confirm long-term uptrends, despite the market's sideways action, by also showing successively higher lows at each of the three recent major low points. By contrast, 29 groups have demonstrated below-average relative strength by posting suc- cessively lower highs at each of the three market periods in question. Of these 29, three (Cosmetics, Foods, and Soap) have posted series of lower lows, thus suggesting rather dramatic weakness relative to the general market. In terms of recent lows, it is perhaps of more than passing interest that no fewer than 61 of the 96 industry groups under study have been able, along with the major averages, to post successively higher bottoms, first last fall, then in January, and finally over the past month. Some two-thirds of the market, therefore, has been able to maintain the same shred of momentum that has been kept up by the Dow Jones Industrials and S & P 500. Of the 35 groups failing to post higher low points, only four (the three mentioned above plus Offshore Drilling) have posted a series of three lower lows. ' On an overall basis, it certainly cannot be asserted that recent leadership has been as broad as in earlier stages of the advance, but individual group studies fail to show any evidence of unusual underlying weakness. By and large, since last September, individual industries have managed to follow their own divergent paths and, in general, provide worthwhile opportunities for the alert investor. . Dow-Jones Industrials (12 00 PM) S & P Composite (12 00 PM) Cumulative Index (5/25/79) 836.28 99.99 734.13 ANTHONY W. TABELL DELAFIELD, HARVEY, TABELL AWTsla No llalemcn! or cxpreSlon of op,nIon or any other motler herein contamed IS, or IS to be deemed 10 be, directly or mdlrectly, on offer or the SOI'Cllotlon of on offer 10 buy or sell ony secunty referred to or mentIoned The moiler 15 presented merely for the ConVllllenCt of the subscrIber Whdll we bllllevll the SOU'CIlS of our infOrma- tIon to be reliable, we In no way represent or guarantee the accurocy thereof nor of the stotements mude hereIn Any actIon to be token by the subSCriber should be based on hIS own lJIveshgatlon ond InformatIon Janney Montgomery SCali, Inc, as a corporatIon, and lIs offIcers or employees, may now have, or may later lake, POSItIonS or hades In respect to any secUfltl(!S mentioned In thIS or any future Issue, and such positIon may be dIfferent from any vIews now or hereafter Ilxpressed In thIS or any othllr Issue Janney Montgomery Scott, Inc, whIch IS regIstered WIth the SEC as on mvestmllnt adVIsor may gIve adVIce to lIs Investment adVIsory ond other ('Ustomers Independently of ony stalements mode lJI thIS or 1JI any other IHue Funher InformatIon on any secuflty mentIoned hereIn IS ovallable' on request AEROSPACE ALUMINUM AUTOMOBILE AUTO — EXC GEN MOTORS AUTO PARTS — AFTER AUTO PARTS–ORIG EQUIP AUTO TRUCKS & PART BEVERAGES — BREWERS BEVERAGES — DISTILLERS BEVERAGES–SOFT DRINKS BLDG MATRLS — AIR COND BLDG MATRLS — CEMENT BLDG BLDG MATRLS–ROOF/WLBD BUILDING MATRLS — COMP CHEMICALS COAL — – CONGLOMERATES– — CONTNRS — METAL/GLASS CONTNRS — PAPER COPPER COSMETICS DRUGS ELECTRICAL EQUIP ELEC/ELECTRN–MAJOR COS ELECT — HOUSEHOLD APP ELECTRONICS ELECTRONICS (SEMI/COM()) ENTERTAINMENT FERTILIZERS FOODS — COMPOSITE FOREST PRODUCTS GOLD MINING REAL ESTATE HOME FURNISHINGS HOSPITAL MGMNT COS. HOSPITAL SUPPLIES HOTEL/MOTEL LEISURE TIME MACHINE TOOLS MACHINERY — AGRIC. MACH–CONST/MATRL MACHINERY – IND/SPEC METAL FABRICATING METALS MISC MOBILE HOMES OFFICE EQUIPMENT OFC EQUIP — EXCL IBM …… …. OIL CRUDE PROD. OIL DOMESTIC INTEG OIL INTL INTEG OIL COMPOSITE OIL WELL EQ & SVC PAPER POLLUTION CONTROL PUBLISHING PUBLISHING (NEWSPAPERS) BRDCASTRS — RADIO/TV RAILROAD EQUIP. RESTAURANTS RETAIL STORES — DISC. RETAIL STORES — DEPT. RETAIL STORESDRUG RETAIL STRS–FOOD CHNS GENERAL MERCHANDISE CHAINS RETAIL — COMPOSITE SHOES SOAPS STEEL STEEL — EXCL US STEEL FOOD; SUGAR TEXTLS — APPAREL MFRS TEXTILE PRODUCTS TEXTILES–SYNTHFIBR TIRE & RUBBER GOODS TOSACCO/CIGARETTE MANU TO'fS VENDING MACHINES ELECTRIC POWER – — -N1\TUR.4L GAS NATURAL GAS–PIPELNS TELEPHONE TELEPHONE — EXCL AT&T AIR TRANSPORT RAILROADS TRUCKERS BANKS — NEW YORK CITY BANKS — OUTSIDE NYC INSURANCE — LIFE INSURANCE — MULTI LN. INSURANCE — PROP/LIAS SAVINGS & LOAN ASSOC. FINANCE COS PERSONAL LOANS INVESTMENT COS REAL ESTATE INV TRUSTS THREE HIGHER HIGHS DR LOWS HI GH5 LOW 5 MAY 31 1978 DEC 22 1978 MAR 7 1978 SEP 13 1978 J.4N 24 1978 APR 11 1978 SEP 20 1978 JAN 31 1979 .4PR 18 1979 DEC 20 1978 FEB 28 1979 MAY 23 1979 125.42 116.11 103.25 113.00 81.45 72.65 29.70 26.52 17.25 16.04 16.76 15.64 54.71 44.30 41.98 37.47 131.97 139.86 127.36 116.66 30.73 32.61 35.53 31.48 91.64 76.37 77.45 64.70 65.86 58.38 57.98 55.25 37.60 T 19.3-0 – 17.72 41.31 35.35 166.47 154.89 28.48 28.98 75.56 67.44 18.04 16.70 31.00 28.62 96.10 82.15 163.29 132.65 25.86 26.64 22.92 20.n 182.03 167.01 12.59 10.79 79.48 71.98 2L06 21.54 116.80 107.12 27.02 20.60 24.78 24.46 0.00 0.00 42.37 36.80 74.46 56.74 35.89 28.61 65.01 55.99 78.30 73.96 43.14 41.20 125.56 111.96 162.55 141.25 50.75 52.71 73.03 53.96 124.93 126.99 26.42 25.42 57.01 28.40 27.58 175.46 172.26 159.09 154.70 167.81 163.09 10B.03 104.26 247.42 225.19 32.71 27.14 28.90 29.12 27.67 24.47 50.29 45.22 74.63 62.09 30.06 24.74 21.09 16.21 150.80 128.35 26.41 21.39 62.25 54.58 9.18 7.39 91.06 75.83 56.55 49.56 177.06 167.91 50.03 45.50 50.17 46.61 22.34 19.10 31.56 30.79 53.96 41.25 58.76 56.09 132.93 126.84 81.75 77.01 13.58 12.68 32.55 8.44 35.07, ….,32.90 79-;S7 144.10 13u.77 28.02 28.23 43.51 42.01) 65.18 50.46 49.37 45.14 117.15 77.02 49.43 45.00 116.70 103.61 23.10 20.45 16.67 15.43 120.51 106.09 31.62 26.01 67.85 58.74 93.18 83.10 49.84 47.28 2.28 2.02 110.67 X 1 98.19 117.86 . 74.47 1 'I 95.85 68.28 26.70 1 23.41 16.29 1 14.76 15.81 1 14.24 47.31 36.22 X 1 I 41.18 34.18 149.01 . 108.19 X 1 I 120.68 106.54 32.54 I 28.39 32.96 I 25.41 83.01 , 67.74 69.29 1 58.09 61.63 1 51.73 57.88 1 50.27 36.37 -1838 I 36.66 1 —-,27 . 21..-5 79 33.57 169.98 1 144.26 33.61, 25.20 61.82 X 1 64.21 16.25 X 15.17 27.74 X 1 26.50 82.61 1 77.52 140.45 I 123.53 28.19' 20.37 1 I 22.59 18.21 164.97 X 12.78 I I 138.72 9.40 70.31 X 23.32 I I 68.94 18.61 115.24 1 89.44 24.91 23.93 X 1 I 15.83 23.09 0.00 34.30 X 1 I 0.00 33.89 60.97 I 43.88 27.90 X 1 25.05 64.04 76.17 1 I 48.01 65.63 41.02 X 117.22 148.93 I I I 36.98 98.56 116.57 57.76 47.41 X 129.23 1 I 1 44.84 45.08 106.97 25.35 X 1 22.14 ….. ..;.1—-……… -.- 31.99 1 23.56 198.25 166.00 1 I 160.83 148.58 180.94 I 155,06 114.31 I 94.34 242.27 I 202.82 26.94 X I 25.15 27.00 I 23.34 24.03 X 1 22.82 42.46 X 1 42.27 62.17 23.52 X 1 I 57.30 23.30 18.58 I 13.40 128.92 I 121.90 21.72 I 20.87 61.40 I 50.03 7.57 78.60 50.43 158.95 X 46.46 1 I I I I 7.19 73.12 44.53 159.27 39.97 49.13 I 41.18 22.81 1 16.57 32.26 49.45 1 I 27.68 38.98 61.34 1 51.26 124.60 X 1 111.43 76.47 X 1 73.90 11.86 t 10.63 27.38 X I 25.12 32.57 X I . , 31.47 147.56 27.93 40.88 X 46.09 X 49.91 84.17 44.77 X 103.36 X 21.06 16.49 120.10 26.86 65.92 81.45 X 45.68 X 2.14 1 1 1 I 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 118.69 27.10 39.66 44.02 42.06 69.59 42.2 97.25 19.27 13.23 98.43 23.12 54.42 76.49 42.78 1.89 102.14 107.10 68.20 24.31 14.57 14.66 42.10 35.69 132.17 107.04 31.60 29.27 72.84 62.17 56.13 51.89 3106 . 33.68 153.58 29.77 60.27 15.52 26.84 76.88 126.57 25.13 18.24 153.14 11.15 68.77 21.09 103.35 18.78 22.68 0.00 31.67 46.63 25.66 52.91 71.15 38.89 108.50 134.48 52.89 46.51 120.53 22.71 27.31 168.71 152.68 161.31 99.77 218.14 25.71 25.52 22.96 42.41 57.52 21.32 15.15 121.77 19.58 54.51 7.12 74.06 47.44 158.19 41.93 43.80 17.52 30.44 39.88 53.02 118.39 73.00 11.79 22.15 17783 129.22 27.54 40.33 4u.23 43.79 74.64 40.92 96.15 19.31 14.46 104.20 23.39 58.36 78.72 42.38 2.00 101.14 111.59 . 72.64 25.04 . 14.73 15.43 . 46.65 33.31 140.38 . 97.79 31.50 30.26 . 79.19 . 67.64 . 59.67 . 53.00 17.79 . 35.60 147.40 30.45 58.02 X 15.61 . 26.77 80.39 136.97 . 25.52 19.30 . 149.64 12.11 . 66.59 X 21.99 106.58 24.84 . 23.02 0.00. 32.86 54.05. 23.20 61.27 . 71.22 37.09 114.7u . 139.20 50.25 41.45 124.83 24.53 . -,43.89 -X.,.-…. 30.88. 190.99 . 158.85 173.75 110.13 232.51 . 24.64 25.81 22.54 41.53 61.35 22.90 18.01 128.38 20.97 56.24 7.14 74.85 . 49.52 153.97 X 42.93 . 46.03 . 21.12 . 31.47 46.14 54.30 117.58 74.84 13.82 25.69 . 81-;-22 …… 140.26 25.98 39.75 41.25 79.66 43.84 99.96 20.18 15.41 115.08 25.88 . 60.44 81.07 43.74 2.07 X THREE LOWER HIGHS OR LOWS

—- TABELL'S MARKET LETTER 909 STATE ROAD, PRINCETON, NEW JERSEY 08540 DIVISION OF MEMBER NEW YORK STOCK EXCHANGE, INC MEMBER AMERICAN STOCK EXCHANGE – June 1, 1979 Tlieo … tost-Uboofn.'refu5aI proViae conviricmg . t buttress either a bullish or bearish case. We pointed out two weeks ago that, having reacted to a closing level of 825.02 on May 14, the Dow Jones Industrials had reached the most plausible downside target suggested by the April- May top and had attained a normally oversold condition. The stage was thus set for a rally, and such an event did indeed ensue. It will not, however, go down as one of the more memor- able upsurges in stock-market history. All that, in fact, took place was a 2t percent advance to a high of. 845. 37 on May 22 over a period of seven trading days with most of that advance compressed into a one-day rally two weeks ago. Nor was the aftermath any more impressive. A bullish case could have been provided by a modest retracement of the decline, some consolidation, and resumption of the upswing. Instead the Dow spent the better part of the last two weeks reversing the whole process, and indeed returned to a new closing low of 822.16 in a lO-point debacle on Wednesday of this week. To date, however, the situation has not really altered that much from the one which existed a fortnight ago. It was axiomatic that, following the April-May decline, a base would have to form, and it is certainly not inconceivable that the last two weeks of trading constitute a part of that base formation process. Indeed, if one expects another attack on the April high of 878.72 — and this continues, for the time being at least, to be our own expectation — a broader base than now exists will be required. We would not, therefore, find it surprising for the present directionless climate to continue through middle or late June. While all this is going on, various market segments pursue their own diverse paths. Since it has been. enjQying its own bull.maxkeLsm.l!ei9H, awar'Lql.Lf–lI–1 the eXistence of tlie American Stock Exchange. However, hie action west of Broadway continues to be, to say the least, exciting. While other indicators were moving ahead modestly, the ASE Market Value Index soared, as recently as Tuesday, to a new 4t-year high of 187.49. Now a great deal of this is due, as we have suggested here in the past, to the fact that the Amex features a large number of dually-listed Canadian issues, and Toronto continues to enjoy one of the better bull markets, especially in oil and gas exploration, that. it has seen since the late 1950's. Nonetheless, we do not think that American Stock Exchange strength can be idly dismissed, any more than it was possible to dismiss the strength of secondary issues which occurred during 1976-1977, while major stocks as represented by the Dow and S & P 500 were moving lower. The current climate, it must be stressed, is not a total repetition of that two-year-ago period. At that point strength was evident, not only on the American Stock Exchange but also among secondary issues listed on the NYSE, as represented by the action of broad-based indicators such as our own Cumulative Index. This particular sort of diversity came to an abrupt end last September. Since that time, the Cumulative Index has demonstrated action no better than the Dow,.albeit, it must be noted, no worse. The current relative secondary strength is a great deal more concentrated and focused in individual groups of stocks such as the north-of-the- border oil companies whiCh are an ASE feature. We are not, incidentally, particularly inclined to view the Amex action with alarm. The bull market there has been long and dynamic, and we have never been subject to the delusion that such advances go on forever. We are also, however, aware that picking tops is a difficult exercise, especially a few days after a high. That the ASE hasbeen in a pha;;e-for- quite some time cannot be gainsaid. The suggestion that the move is over or WIll be so m the near future is more difficult to support. Dow Jones Industrials (12 00 PM) S & P Composite (12 00 PM) Cumulative Index (5/31/79) AWTsla 820.69 99.02 729.84 ANTHONY W. TABELL DELAFIELD, HARVEY', TABELL No statement or expreSSion of OPinion or any olher matter herein contained IS, or 's to be deemed 10 be, directly or II'Idorectly, on offer or the solicitatIon of on offer to buy or sell any security referred to or mentioned The matter IS presented merely for the convellcnCe of the subscriber While oNe believe the sources of ow Informa tlon to be reliable, we In no way represent or guorontee the occuracy thereof nor of thc stotements mude herEin Any octlon to be taJEn by the subscnber should be based on hiS own investigation and Informotlon Janney Montgomery Scott, Inc, as a corporation, and ,ts off,cers or employees, may now have, or moy later toke, pos,tlons or trades In respect to any seuntles menhoned In Ih'5 or any future Issue, and such posil,on may be different from ony views now or hereafter ,expressed In Ihu or any other Issue Jonney Montgomery Scott, Inc, which IS registered with the SEC as on Investment adVisor, may give adVICe to lis Investment odvlsory and olhel customers Independently of any slatements made ,n thiS or In any olher Issue Further Informotlon on any security mentioned herein IS available on request

TABELL-S MARKET LETTER 909 STATE ROAD, PRINCETON, NEW JERSEY 08540 DIVISION OF MEMBER NEW YORK STOCK eXCHANGE. tNC MEMBER AMERICAN STOCK E)(CHANGE – June 8, 1979 ..,..' -weeK'-s'iil'iil'ket acfionJeaturecLaf8ir–Elmoufieof'strEm-gth–;strengtlPcommencin-g from,a – – level that, from a technical point of view, was not all that surprising. The Dow had spent the last week of May around or slightly below the previous low of 825.02, attained on May 14. On Tuesday, May 30, in a ten-point drop, it declined slightly below that low, and closings for the rest of the week were all in the 822- 821 range. As the new lows were attained, volume dried up, approaching the lowest levels of the past few months. Finally, with an almost classic test complete, a ten-point rally this Tuesday was followed by renewed firmness and sharply expand- ing volume, the NYSE experiencing the highest level of daily trading it had enjoyed since last fall. This sort of action reinforces our current feeling that the Dow, at least, is in a process of base formation, which will ultimately lead to a new short /intermediate-term upswing. It is perhaps ill-advised, however, to focus too strenuously on the Dow Jones Industrial Average. While the venerable indicator is, at most times, an adequate proxy for overall stock market action, there do exist periods when it is less than satisfactorily descriptive. The pres- ent is, we think, just such a period, for most other market indices are demonstrating behavior noticeably divergent from that of the Dow. In this space last week, we focused on the amazing divergence being demonstrated by the American Stock Exchange Index. The extent of this divergence was demonstrated to us in rather homely fashion this week, when the young lady who is responsible for posting our market charts and having them on our desks each morning informed us that the ASE chart was missing, having run off the top of the page. She was, indeed, a bit surprised that such an occurrence should have taken place. However, since her experience is relatively limited, she is to be forgiven. There was a time, we told her, when charts ran off the top of the page with A decade or so-ago-, by defiffitlon, a'stocK'WH6se chartailnotnav cwu UL–a-w ragged pieces of paper glued to the upper right hand corner was demonstrating sub-par per- formance. In any case, what has been going on on the Amex recently demonstrates most of the attributes of a classic bull market. It is worth noting that, at its low of 1974, the American Stock Exchange Market Value Index was under 60. At its most recent level of 194.53, it has more than tripled, demonstrating, at least, that some areas of the stock market have, of late, provided notable investment results. However, as noted above, the ASE is not the only area noticeably outperforming the Dow. The last major benchmark high for the Industrials took place on April 10 of this year at 878.72. At that point the comparable high reached by the Dow-Jones Transportation Average was 235.25. While the Industrials were dropping some 50-plus points into mid-May, the carrier index correct- ed to the 220.88 level in early May and has essentially trended upward without correction since. The April -high was comfortably exceeded at Thursday's close of 239.24, and, as far as this index is concerned, it must be assumed that a short-term uptrend from the early May lows is still in effect. The broadly based S & P 500 has also been considerably stronger than the Dow. At its cur- rent level of 101. 79, it has moved up steadily from its mid-May low of 98.06, and it is extremely close to the April high figure of 103.34. The same is true of our more broadly-based and equally-weighed Cumulative Index which, at 745, is closing in on its April high of 756. The interpretative significance of this, we think, lS that the DJIA's move to new lows two weeks ago gave an unduesuggestion of market weakness which was not reflected by most other indica- tors. Most other averages appear to have undergone only a normal short-term correction in early April-May, and either have already posted -(as in the case of the ASE and the DJTA) new highs or should, in our opinion, shortly do so. The major test for the market will not, in our view, come at the April highs, but at the highs of last September. These peaks are, respect- ively, 907.74 in the Dow, 261. 49 in Transportation Index, 106.99 for the S & P 500, and 830.55 for our Cumulative Index. It is market action at or just below these levels which will test the admittedly debatable thesis that a major upswing from the 1974 lows remains in effect. ANTHONY W. TAB ELL DELAFIELD, HARVEY, TABELL Dow Jones Industrials (12 00 PM) S & P Composite (1200 PM) Cumulative Index (6/8/79) 835.50 101. 48 744.47 AWT sla No statement or expression of Opinion or any other moiler herein contolned IS, or IS 10 be deemed to be, dlrCc1ly or Indirectly, on offer or the SOllCllallon of on offer to buy or sell any referred to or mentioned The morter IS presented merely for the conVeilenCe of the subscriber While we believe the sources of our informa- Tion To be reliable, we In no way represent or guarantee the accuracy thereof nor of the mude herein Any action To be token by the subSCriber should be based on hiS own Investigation and Information Janney Montgomery SCali. Inc, as a corporation, and Its offiCers or employees, may now have, or may later toke, positions or trades In respect to any securities mentioned In thiS or ony future Issue, and such POSition may be different from any views now or hereafter expressed In this or any other ISlue Janney Montgomery Scott, Inc, which 15 registered With the SEC as on Investment adVisor, moy give adVice to Its Investment adVISOry and other customers Independently of any statements mode In thiS or In any other Issue Further Information on any security mentioned herein IS available on request

TABELL'S MARKET LETTER' . 909 STATE ROAD, PRINCETON, NEW JERSEY 08540 DIVISION OF cfoll1ly Jim,;;;;.!! Y/tt JnC. MEMBER NEW YORK STOCK EXCHANGE, INC MEMBER .AMERICAN STOCK EXCHANGE June 15, 1979 summer rally.' As time readers of this are aware, we- have this phenomenon for some years. The following table updated through 1978 shows the number of advances and declines for the one-and two-month periods ended each month of each year from 1926 through 1978, together with the average percentage change for the period. One-Month Periods (from 1926-1978) Two-Month Periods (from 1926-1978) Ending Month January February March April May June July August September October November December Advances 34 28 29 30 27 26 34 34 22 28 31 40 Declines 19 25 .24 23 26 27 19 19 31 25 22 13 Average Chg. 0.96 -0.07 -0.07 1.10 -0.83 0.88 1. 88 1. 38 -1. 36 -0.45 0.43 1. 34 Advances 35 29 25 32 31 25 33 36 31 25 31 Declines 18 24 28 21 22 28 20 17 22 28 22 17 Average Chg. 2.36 0.90 -0.23 1.11 0.50 0.02 2.71 3.42 -0.02 -1. 77 0.01 A preliminary look at the table, indeed, supports the notion of a probable summer rally. The average monthly advance for the Dow over the period has been .43, whereas the average performance in July is an advance of 1. 88, more than four times as great. Likewise, the average advance of 3.42 for the two months ended August is a good deal larger than the average two-month advance. It would, indeed, appear that the expectation of an advancing market during July and August has some solid grounding in fact. There exist a few reservations. The first factor which needs to be pointed out is that a large part of the high average advance for the summer period rests on the accident of the 1932 bottom's having occurred at the end of June. Thus, July and August of that year produced the largest two-month advance in stock market history, an astounding 70 rise. If this single year is eliminated from consideration, the results for July and August are much closer to normal. ' Secondly, while it is true that July and August do show significant pluralities of advancing months over declining months, it must be remembered that advancing periods tend to outnumber declining ones over the 52 years by almost three to two. When standard tests of statistical Significance are applied, the period with the clearest seasonal action is the month of December, which is why this letter has always emphasized the importance of the year-end rally. Likewise, the tendency toward a declining market in September is statistically more significant than that of a rise in July or August. Interestingly enough, none of the other months show any discernible seasonable pattern whatsoever. As we approach summer, 1979, however, We are more inclined than usual to think that the summer rally may, this year, materialize. As we have been pointing out in recent issues, the Dow Jones Industrial Average has been forming a pattern which' has many of the characteristics of a base formation preceding a short term advance. These characteristics include a twice-tested bottom around 820, sharp up-and-down moves, and expanded volume On rallying phases. In addition, as we noted last week, most indicators other than the Dow have moved into short-term uptrend phases suggesting that the eventual DJIA breakout will be on the upside. This pattern appears to be nearing completion as June comes to its end. We think that this phenomenon, in conjunction with the summer-rally tendency, suggests July- August strength. Dow Jones Industrials (12 00 PM) S & P Composite (12 00 PM) Cumulative Index (6/15/79) 843.73 102.29 752.96 ANTHONY W. TABELL DELAFIELD, HARVEY, TABELL AWTjt No statement or e)prenlon of opinion or ony olher matter herein contained IS, or IS to be deemed to be, directly or ,ndirectly, on offer or the SOllCllollon of on offer to buy or sell any security referred to or mentioned The moiler IS presenTed merely for the conveflience of the subSCriber While Ill' believe the SOurces of our Informo han to be rehable, we In no woy represent or guorantee the occurocy Ihereof nor of the mude herein Any action 1-0 be by the subSCriber should be based on hiS own InveStlgOllon and Information Janney Montgomery Seoll. Inc, 0 a corporation. and 11 offICers or employees, moy now have. or may 10lCr lOire. pOllhons or Irodes In respect fa any secuntlel mentioned In thiS or any future Issue. ond such pOSition may be different from ony Views now or hereafter In thn or any other Issue Janney Montgomery Scott, Inc. which IS regiStered With Ihe SEC as on Investment adVisor, may give adVice to Its Investment adVIsory and othel customers mdependently of any stotements mode m thiS or In any other Issue Further mformalon on any secunty mentioned herem IS o'/otiable on request

TABELL'S MARKET LETTER 909 STATE ROAD. PRINCETON. NEW JERSEY 08540 DIVISION OF MEMBER New YORK STOCK EXCHANGE, INC MEMBER AMERICAN STOCK EXCHANGE – ….,.,.,,- June 22, 1979 There has been repeated comment in this space on the behavior of the American Stock Exchange Index, behavior widely at variance with other market indicators based on larger and more heavily capitalized issues. The AMEX Index, it will be' recalled, has been moving regularly ahead to H-year bull market highs, while other averages have been languishing. This has led, in turn, to expressions of sanctimonious disapproval on the part of some commentators, especially those of bearish persuasion, suggesting the presence of rampant speculation and warning of the ultimate consequences thereof. Now, we are as able as anyone else to observe the activity in gambling issues and rumored takeover candidates, and we share the gut feeling that speculative juices are indeed flowing in the marketplace. Its actual extent, however, is difficult to quantify by historical standards. Many years ago, one of the simplest and most reliable indicators of speculative activity was the relationShip between American Stock Exchange and New York Stock Exchange volume. Generally, whenever ASE volume reached 50 of NYSE volume (here and throughout we will be referring to 4-week moving averages), it was a fairly reliable suggestion that the speculative activity was unusual, and that a top might not be too far away. There have been only 11 periods since 1945 when the 50 figure was reached. Such periods took place prior to the 1946 decline, the 1960 ,drop, the ,majorbear mar!ets of 1961-1962 and .1966, li68-1970. All other cases preceeded at best, consolidation periods. In most instances, lead time was ample. The difficulty has been, of course, that, since 1968, the level of AMEX volume has begun to dry up on a secular basis. Prior to that time, it had remained in the range of 30-60 of NYSE volume. It has more recently declined, generally, to the 9-15 level. Quite obviously, the old standards are inappropriate. We have done some preliminary work on reVlSlOn of this indicator to see if it could be made more applicable to today's trading and have begun with the approach of examining the ASE-NYSE volume ratio in relationship to its own 52-week moving average. If one accepts the criterion of AMEX volume percentage reaching 1. 5 times its own 52-week moving average for a bearish signal, some interesting results are attained. It is found, for example, that this occurred in 9 instances between 1945 and 1968, and that 8 of these instances coincided with the old measurement of 50 as an indicator of excessive speculation. Interestingly, however, there are two additional cases where this has occurred. The first was in March, 1976, during the early stages of the 1976-1978 market decline. The second occurred in mid-September, 1978, just prior to the short, but vicious decline in October. This approach, it seems to us, may, therefore, have some validity under today's conditions. AMEX volume has been rising recently, but not to the extent where this indicator would suggest caution. For the past 4 weeks, it has.averaged 15, versus an average of 13.8 over the past year. Weekly ASE voluffi-e has-most recently been 30 million shares, around -' 6 million shares a day. At current levels of NYSE activity, it would have to increase and remain consistently at around the 7! million share level for this device to turn negative. This has not yet taken place, ANTHONY W. TABELL DELAFIELD, HARVEY, TABELL Dow Jones Industrials (12 00 PM) S & P Composite (1200 PM) Cumulative Index (6/21/79) 844.85 102.43 757.86 AWT ld – No statement or expression of opinIon or any other matler herein contolned 15, or IS to be deemed to be, directly or mdrrectly, on offer or the sollcltotlon of on offer to buy or sell any seCtJnty referred to or mentioned The matter IS presented merely for the of the subscriber While -ne believe the SOl,lrces of our informa- tion to be relloble, we In no way represent or guarantee Ihe accuracy thereof nor of the statements mude herein Any ochon to be taken by the subscriber should be bosed on hiS own invesTigation and infOrmation lonney Montgomery Scott, Inc, as a corporation, ond Its officers or employees, moy now hove, or may lotcr toke, poslhons or Trades In respect to ony seCtJrltles mentioned In thiS or ony futurc Issue, ond such pOSition may be different from ony v,ews now or hereafter expressed In thiS or any other Issue Janney Montgomery Scotl, Inc, which 15 reglsered With the SEC as on Investment adVisor, moy give odvlce to lIS Investment adVisory and other customers Independently of any statements mode In thiS or In any other Issue Fl,Irrher Information on any security mentioned herein IS aVOIlable on request

TABELL'S MARKET LETTER 909 STATE ROAD, PRINCETON NEW JERSEY 08540 DIVI910N OF MEMBER NEW YORK STOCK eXCHANoe, INC MEMBER AMERICAN STOCK EXCHANGE r– June 29, 1979 …. Interms. the,significt — the Dow'-Jories fa the venerableindicator since .. – 1959. Chrysler and Esmark left the Index and were replaced by IBM, America's largest enter- prise in terms of market value, and Merck & Company. A third change, which would have taken place anyway, was, ironically, statistically more important. Du Pont had been the !1lost heavily weighted component of the Dow, comprising in excess of 10t of the total weight of the Index. Its 3-for-1 split, effective today, brings that, weight below 31, a change which affects the average more than either of the two additions. IBM will now comprise just under 6 of the total weight in the Dow, comparable to its 6.4 weight in the S & P 500. It will not, however, be the largest Dow component as long as Procter & Gamble continues to have a higher price. Merck, with a 5.32. weight, will be the next largest component. The weights of some of the other larger components will continue to be similar to their respec- tive weights in the Standard & Poors. Exxon will account for 4.25 of the Dow versus 3.48 of the S & P, and General Motors for 4.81 and 2.52 respectively. It is interesting that the two additions almost exactly offset the du Pont split plus the two removals, thus necessitating only modest weight changes in the 27 other components. The following table shows the price with the old and new weights in the Dow and their changes for the 32 securities involved. (It is calculated as of Wednesday's close and will, there- fore, be modestly different from the official calculation made as of Thursday's close.) ST0C K —-' ALLIED CHEMICAL CORP ALUMINUM CO OF AMER AMERICAN BRANDS AMERICAN CAN CO AMERICAN TEL & TEL BETHLEHEM STEEL CORP CHRYSLER CORP DU PONT DE NEMOURS EASTMAN KODAK CO ESMARK INC EXXON CORP GENERAL ELECTRIC CO GENERAL FOODS CORP GENERAL MOTORS CORP GOODYEAR TIR & RUBBR INCO I BM INTERNATNL HARVESTER INTERNATIONAL PAPER JOHNS MANVILLE CORP MERCK & CO INC MINNESOTA MINING MFG OWENS ILLINOIS INC PROCTER & GAMBLE SEARS ROEBUCK CO STANDARD OIL CALIF TEXACO INC UNION CARBIDE CORP UNITED STATES STEEL UNITED TECHNOLOGIES WESTINGHOUSE ELECT WOOLWORTH FW CO PRICE 35.000 52.000 59.000 38.625 57.500 21.500 9.625 127.250 58.000 26.750 52.250 50.000 31. 500 59.125 16.250 20.750 73.500 39.125 45.250 24.375 65.500 56.500 19.000 77.000 19.000 47.875 26.625 37.625 21.750 37.125 19.625 26.625 OLD WEIGHT 2.89 4.29 4.87 3.19 4.74 1.77 0.79 10.49 4.78 2.21 4.31 4.12 2.60 4.88 1. 34 1.71 0.00 3.23 3.73 2.01 0.00 4.66 1. 57 6.35 1. 57 3.95 2.20 3.10 1. 79 3.06 1. 62 2. 20 NEW WEIGHT 2.84 4.23 4.80 3.14 4.67 1. 75 0.00 3.45 4.71 0.00 4.25 4.06 2.56 4.81 1. 32 1. 69 5.97 3.18 3.68 1. 98 5.32 4.59 1. 54 6.26 1. 54 3.89 2.16 3.06 1. 77 3.02 1. 59 2.16 CHANGE -0.04 -0.06 -0.07 -0.05 -0.07 -0.03 -0.79 -7.05 -0.07 -2.21 -0.06 -0.06 -0.04 -0.07 -0.02 -0.02 5.97 -0.05 -0.05 0.03 5.32 -0.07 -0.02 -0. 09 -0.02 -0.06 -0.03 -0.04 -0.03 -0.04 -0.02 -0.03 Dow-Jones Industrials (12 00 PM) S & P Composite (12 00 PM) Cumulative Index (6/29/79) AWTsla 840.96 102.62 724.76 ANTHONY W. T ABELL DELAFIELD, HARVEY, TAB ELL No ,Iclement or expreulon of opinion or any other matter hereH) contolned IS or 1 to be deemed 10 be, directly Of indirectly an offer or the soitcltatlon of on offer to buy or sell any security referred to or mentioned The matter presented merely fOf the converlence of the subscriber While '/Ie believe the sources of our mlormot,on to be reliable, we ,n no way represent or guarantee the occurocy thereof nor of the statements mude herein Any action to be taKen by the subscflber should be based on hIS own Inveshgotlon and Informahon Janney Montgomery Scott, Inc, 05 a corporation, and lIS offICers or employees, may now have, or 'nay laler tOKe, POSitions or trades In respect to any seCUrities mentioned m thiS or any future Issue, and such pOSition may be different from O'1y views now or hereafter expressed In thiS or ony other Issue Janney Montgomery Scott, Inc, whICh IS registered With the SEC as on mvestment adVisor, may give adVice to ItS mvestment adVisory ond othel I;I.Istomers mdependently of any statements mode m thl! or m any other hsue Further mformotlon on any security mentIOned herein IS available on request

TABELL'S MARKET LETTER , J 909 STATE ROA.D, PRINCETON. NEW JERSEY 08540 DIVISION OF MEMBER NEW YORI( STOCK EXCHANGE, INC MEMBER A.MERICAN STOCK EXCHANGe July 6, 1979 and Merck in; Chrysler arid 'Esmark out; from readers. It was asked, for example, why the split in du Pont caused the weight of that stock in the Dow to be reduced substantially. The answer lies in the method of computation chosen by Dow-Jones in 1897, when the Average was started, and maintained ever since. That method was the eminently simple and sensible one of adding the prices of the individual component stocks and dividing by the number of those components. However, this technique, exactly the same one we were all taught to use when com- puting an average in grade school, posed a question of how to adjust for stock splits. One method that could have been applied would have been, if a stock split, say, 2 for I, forever after to multiply the price of that stock by two. Dow-Jones rejected this method. They decided instead that, when a stock split occurred, they would adjust the divisor, so that the reduction in the price of the component stock due to the split would not affect the average. The same technique of divisor adjustment would be used when individual stocks were added or removed. Needless to say, there have been a good many such changes since 1897, and these, in most cases, resulted in a reduction of the divisor, which is now 1.465. This relatively low divisor accounts for the fact that the Dow is now well above 800, although none of its individual components sells above 80. This difference between the level of the average and the level of the average stock in the average is one of the commonly-voiced objections to the Dow as an indicator. Another is the arbitrary weighting of each stock by the price at which it happens to sell, a weighting that is radically changed by splits. Thus du Pont around 120 constituted more than 10 percent of the average. At around 40 it constitutes about 3 percent. Procter & Gamble and IBM, because of their high price, are about four times as important to the Dow as Goodyear and Sears Roebuck for the same reason. Why, it may be asked, did Dow-Jones not choose the first alternative referred to above, multiplying the split prices by the amount of the split ,or did it not choose to weight equal dollar investment newspaper , and it was, a time, market indicator. One of the components, however, was IBM, and, as most of us are aware, the price history of IBM in the 1940's and 1950's was somewhat spectacular. Under these conditions the weight of IBM in the index in question became so heavy that, as an average, it was entirely useless. It simply tended to reflect what its major component was doing. The average has since been discontinued. What other methods for computing averages exist Standard & Poors has chosen to weight its indices by capitalizations, in effect taking the price of each issue in its 500-stock universe and multiplying by the number of shares outstanding. The resultant total market value is then divided by a figure calcu- lated on a given base period, which happens to be 1941-1943. This method has the advantage of obviat- ing any adjustment for splits. Moreover, the inclusion of a large number of stocks prevents any single issue from ever obtaining a disproportional weight. Thus IBM, although the largest component, accounts for only 6 percent of the index. – The difficulty is, in our view, that it is fairly difficult to justify capitalization as a criterion for relative weighting. This is especially true when an index is used as a standard against which to measure portfolio performance, as the S & P often is. The small investor, at least, has an equal opportunity to purchase any of the components of the average. Why, therefore, should Kroehler Manufacturing, the smallest component, carry only 1/300Oth the weight of the largest It is possible, of course, to construct an average which weights all stocks equally. This is precisely what our Cumulative Index does for all issues on the New York Stock Exchange, essentially taking the percentage change for all these issues, averaging it, and applying that percentage change to the index each day. An indicator of this type is called a geometric average. We think this index useful, which is why we compute and publish it, but it also has a limitation, in that to duplicate its performance in an actual portfolio, one would have to keep the individual components of that portfolio equally weighted on a daily basis. This is, of course, impossible. The moral of this whole discussion is that the construction of a market average is hardly the simple task it appears on the surface, and there exists no single perfect method of computation. Different market indicators are appropriately used for different purposes, and it is the responsibility of the analyst to justify the use of a market average in any particular context. Dow-Jones Industrials (1200 PM) S & P Composite (1200 PM) Cumulative Index (7/6/79) 837.54 102.66 759.83 ANTHONY W. TAB ELL DELAFIELD, HARVEY, TABELL AWTsla No statement or expression of OpInion or any other matter herein contained IS, or IS 10 be deemed to be, directly or lOdHectly, on oHer or the Ollcltatlon of on offer to buy or sell any secuflly referred 10 or mel'lfloned The matter IS presented merely for Ihe convellenCE of the subscriber While oNe believe the sources of our Information to be reliable, we In no way represent or guarantee Ihe accuracy thereof nor of Ihe statements mode herein Any !lellon to be token by ihe subscriber should be b!lsed on hiS own Invesllg!ltlon !lnd 'nfarmai'on Janney Montgomery SCali, tnc, !l a corporotlon, ond lIs officers or employees, may now have, or may laler toke, positions or irades In respect to any securities mentioned In Ihls or any future Issue, and such position may be different from ony View! now or hereafter eprened In thiS or ony other IHue Janney Montgomery Scott, Inc, whICh IS registered With the SEC as on Invesiment odvlsor, may give adVICe to tts ,vestment odvlsory and othel customers Independently of any stotements mode In thiS or In ony other Issue Further Informalron on any securrly mentioned herein IS available on request

, –…………… – —- TABEl;L'S MARKET LETTER 909 STATE ROAD, PRINCETON. NEW JERSEY 08540 DIVISION 5'F MEMBER NEW VORK STOCK eXCHANGE, INC MEMBER AMERICAN STOCK eXCHANGe – July 13, 1979 It ; thAt wo hoo Qnont tho lOQt t, Ii, -,. 'L.1-, i. and. ofiiiii n JOneS Industrial Average appropriate because if, in the recent penod, one had focused on the Dow as the only barometer of market action, the impression gained would have been one of less market strength than has actually been the case. For whatever reason, the venerable indicator has, of late, seriously lagged behind most other barometers of market action, and a look at other averages suggests that the market is, in fact, acting a good deal better than the Dow would have us believe. The general pattern of the past fortnight's trading has been one of market strength initiated at the start of the abbreviated Independence-Day week, strength which continued until early this Monday. A correction which occupied just about all of this week's trading set in. In terms of the Dow, the move was from an intraday low of 829.27 on July 3 to a peak around the 857 level early this week, followed by a retracement to lows still being set at this writing. We must, initially, point out that we do not, at this stage, regard the week's retracement of this prior advance as being of yet notable significance. The following discussion, therefore, will center on action. through the highs scored early this week. Even for the Dow, this action was significant. Friday's and Monday's 18-point advance on expanded volume moved the average above a 3-times-tested high in the high 840's, and has, we think, to be considered an upside breakout from a short-term base formation. The most plausible upside objectives of this base formation are somewhere around the 880 level, a figure which would just about equal the intraday peak of 884.62 chalked up on April 11. Therein, of course, lies'the rub. As far as the DJIA is concerned, we are talking about a rally which would do no more than equal the high of three months ago. That high in turn, was Significantly below the 917.27 high chalked up on September 11, 1978 which, of course, is well below the 1976 high of 1014.79. It is not necessary to go searching after esoteric indicators to suggest the stock market has, in fact, acted a great deal better than this. It is, in fact, necessary to search no farther than the Standard 80 Poors 500. Tuesday's high in that indicator was 105.17, significantly above the April 10 peak of 103.83. Thus the 500, as of a few days ago, found itself achieving a new peak in an upswing which began last October and which now, on an intraday basis, has moved that barometer up better than 14. In addition, while the Dow has just commenced a move which can tentatively be targeted to approximate its September, 1978 high, the S 80 P, by contrast, is within hailing distance of that high which was, intraday, 108.05. Indeed at the peak reached early this week, it was just 3 points away, and, the S 80 P is not now all that far away from its 1976 high of 107.83, a figure a shade lower than last fall's peak. These figures may be put in still another perspective. Taking Monday's close as a benchmark, the Dow would have to advance 3 to exceed its April high, 6.4 to exceed its September high, and 19 to move above its 1976 level. The S 80 P, by contrast, has already exceeded the . pril peak, and would need a move of only' 2 to move above its peak levels of 1976 and 1978. Evidence exists, moreover, that it is the Dow rather than the S 80 P which, at the moment, constitutes the aberation. Both Breadth and our Cumulative Indexhave posted'new moves above—l–I their April peaks, and we will not bore our readers by once more detailing the action of the American Stock Exchange Index which proceeds merrily across its chart in a north-by-northeasterly direction. While the financial press is full of stories about recession fears, energy shortages, etc., the stock market, by contrast, appears to be telling its own significantly different story. Dow-Jones Industrials (12 00 PM) 832.42 S & P Composite (12 00 PM) 102.09 Cumulative Index (7/13/79) 764.43 ANTHONY W. TAB ELL DELAFIELD, HARVEY, TABELL AWTsla No statement or expressIon of opInion or cny olner motter herein contolned IS, or IS 10 be deemed 10 be, directly or mdlrectly, on offer or the soliCitation of on offer to buy or sel! cny security referred 10 or mentIOned The motter IS presened merely for the converlenc;E of the While we believe the sources of our Informa- lion to be reliable, we In no way represent or guarantee the acwracy thereof nor of the statements mude herein Any action to be token by the subSCriber should be based on hiS own investigation and information Janney Montgomery SCali, Inc, as a corporation, and Its officers or employees, may now hove, or may later lake, positions or trodes In respect to any 5ecurllics mentioned In thiS or any future Issue, and such position may be different from any views now or hereafter expressed In thl or any other ilsue Janney Montgomery Scott, Inc, which IS registered With Ihe SEC as on Investment adVisor, may give adVice to Its Investment adVisory and other customers Independently of any statements mode In thiS or In any other Issue Further Information on any security mentioned nereln 1 available on request

TABELL'S MARKET LETTER 909 STATE ROAD, PRINCETON, NEW JERSEY 08540 DIVISION OF MEMBER NEW VORK STOCK eXCHANoe, INC MEMBER AMERICAN STOCK EXCHANGe July 20, 1979 .. . -…… –;— – – ;;…..,. ——– —- – 0 – '– A bit over a quarter of a century ago, we entered the-secunties-business and coinmenced a period of training aimed at turning us into something called a market technician. Shortly there- after, having mastered a few of the elements of this art, we loaded a briefcase with charts and went forth into the world, prepared to preach the gospel of this technique to anyone who cared to listen. Few did. Most money managers, 25 years ago, felt that quantitative analysis of the phenomenon of stock prices was of little use in helping them arrive at investment decisions. This feeling, at the time, was based largely on ignorance. Most financial practitioners dis- believed technical analysis simply because they had little idea of what it was. Stock charts were not widely published and were looked at only by a small, and somewhat off-beat, group. Needless to say, this attitude has changed. We would like to think that technical work has become more widely accepted, but in any case, it is indisputable that familiarity with its techniques has grown. Even the latter-day academic assault on technical analysis required some familiarity with the tools involved in order to produce a so-called refutation. The average member of the fmancial community today, whatever his belief of efficacy of technical analysis, has, at least, some understanding of the basic tools involved. This understanding may not be terribly deep. (Anyone can recite e mc 2 without really understanding the Theory of Relativity). The understanding, nevertheless, exists. All of this is occasioned by the fact that, some two weeks ago, an upside breakout in terms of most of the major averages took place. That breakout had a fair amount of conventional significance in technical terms, and we ourselves, in this space last week, noted the breakout and a conventional analysis of its implications. Shortly thereafter, the market reversed and plunged into the trading -ran-ge whence-It had come.' proved, for the time being, to be false — a phenomenon which, in our view, has emerged with increasing frequency as familiarity with technical work has grown. Now it will be argued in some quarters that this retreat was a response to new information, information embodied in President Carter's Sunday-night speech and the subsequent realignment of his staff. We find ourselves unconvinced by this reasoning. The market's immediate response to this speech on Monday, it will be recalled, was to move in a narrow trading range on low volume, doing absoloutely nothing. We suspect, in other words, that the energy situation, however sorry (or sad) it may be, is as much built into the current structure of stock prices as the well- advertised impending recession. The market retreat having occurred, the next point which will be looked for by breakout watchers will be 821.21 on the Dow-Jones Industrial Average, the June 1 low from which the current move started. A downside penetration will, we suppose, be noted as widely as was the recent new high. We suspect that, if it occurs, it will be equally insignificant. None of the above is meant to denigrate the practice of breakout analysis, a practice which, as noted, we engaged in as recently as last week. It is only meant to suggest that such break- outs must be analyzed in terms of an overall and often complex market context. That context does not, in our view, suggest the sort of serious market debacle that conventional analysis of a move below 821 might otherwise indicate. We think, in other words, that the overall market pattern remains constructive, and that the destruction of one link in that constructive chain by the re- tracement of the breakout last week does not alter the basic situation embodied in the overall patterns of most individual stocks. Dow-Jones Industrials (12 00 PM) S & P Composite (12 00 PM) Cumulative Index (7/19/79) 827.47 101. 60 756.01 ANTHONY W. TABELL DELAFIELD, HARVEY, TABELL AWTsla No statement or expreSSIon of opinion or ony other motter herem contained IS, or IS to be deemed to be, directly or Indirectly, on offer or Ihe soliCltotlon of on offer to buy or sell ony security referred 10 or mentioned The matter IS presented merely for the convef'lena of the subSCriber While we believe the sources of our Informa- tion to be reliable, we In no way represent or guarantee the accuracy thereof nor af the statemenlS mude hereto Any action to be token by the subscTlber should be based on hiS own mvestlgatlon and mformatlon Janney Montgomery Scali, Inc, as a corporohon, ond Its offICers or employees, moy now have, or may loter toke, positions or trodes In respect to any seCUrities mentioned In thiS or any future Issue, and such position may be dlfferenl from any views no, or hereafter expressed In thiS or ony other lSue Janney Montgomery Scolt, Inc, which IS registered With the SEC as on Investment adVisor, may give adVICe to lIs Investment adVisory and othel customers Independently at any statements mode In thiS or In any other Issue F'Irther tnformatlon on any security mentioned herein IS available on request

TABELL'S MARKET LETTER 909 STATE ROAC, PRINCETON, NEW JERSEY 08540 DIVISION OF MEMBER NEW VORK STOCK EXCHANGE, INC MEMBER AMERICAN STOCK EXCHANpE July 27, 1979 A few weeks ago, we discussed the details of compilation for the Dow-Jones Industrial Average and averages in general, this being occasioned by the recent DJIA which added IBM and comifared -the Dbw-with Standard-'& -Poors indices — – which are, of course, capitalization weighted rather than effectively weighted by share price as is the Dow. With the recent revisions, another comparison of this sort may be of interest. Standard & Poors 400-Stock Industrial Index is essentially a composite of a number of industrial group indices. While the Dow contains only 30 stocks,'each of these stocks may be thought of as a proxy for an entire industry since most of the Dow components are the major factors in their own industries. The following table divides the Dow into the industrial-group classifications used by Standard & Poors, this breakdown showing that 19 industries are thus represented. Three stocks are treated individually rather than as part of an industry group, since S &; P places them in a miscellaneous category. The table shows, for each group, the number of stocks (in parentheses). the group per- centage weight in the Dow-Jones and in the S &; P 400, and finally the Dow-Jones weight as a percent of ,the S & P weight. Obviously. the larger this last figure, the more the industry group is over- replesented in the Dow relative to the 400, and the closer it is to 100. the greater the similiarity of the two averages as far as the industry is concerned. Industry DJIA Weight S&P 400 Weight DJIA as of 400 Oil -Integrated International (3) Chemicals (3) Soap (1) Electronic – Major (2) Office Equipment (1) Drugs (1) Minnesota Mining (1) Tobacco (1) – …. Auto (1) American Telephone (Ie) Eastman Kodak (1) Aluminium (1) Steel (2) Retail General Merchandise ( 2) Paper (1) Agricultural Machinery ( 1) Aerospace (1) Food (1) Building (Roofing & Wallboard) (1) Metals, Miscellaneous (1) Tire & Rubber (1) 11.00 9.39 6.02 5.80 5.65 5.43 5.37 4.99 4-st 4.67 4.66 4.37 4.25 3.66 3.64 3.43 3.29 3.05 2.58 2.08 1. 57 1. 28 11. 42 96 3.17 296 1. 75 344 2.67 217 9.61 59 -4.47 121 1.10 448 -1. 59 '-0.50 …. 314 …. ''0 3.91 119 6.72 69 1. 52 287 0.80 531 1. 04 352 2.07 176 1. 36 282 0.73 451 1. 74 175 3.24 77 0.45 462 1.17 134 0.40 320 Interestingly, the largest industrial component of the DJIA. International Oils, shows up with almost exactly the same Dow weight as S & P weight, The DJIA contains three international oil stocks compris- ing 11 percent of its total weight; the 400 contains six, with almost identical influence, 11. 42 percent of its total weight. The Dow's biggest distortion arises from the inclusion of two stocks (American Can & Owens Illinois) in the Metal and Glass Container industry, a group which constitutes only half of one percent of the S &; P 400. The inclusion of Alcoa, International Harvester, Goodyear, and American Brands in the Dow tends to overstate the importance of their respective industrial groups as does the inclusion of two steel stocks. Minnesota Mining and, to a lesser degree, Eastman Kodak, exercise a dis- proportionate influence on the Dow.since these stocks must be considered unique rather than represen- tative of large industries. The relationship may be turned around to explore those industry groups which comprise major portions of the 400 and which are unrepresented in the Dow. Here the Dow, especially with its recent changes. appears to be fairly representative. The ten largest industnes in the 400 collectively consti- tute 52 of the weight of that index. Three of these are missing from the Dow. but two are oil-related, and the DJIA does. after all, contain three oil stocks. Conglomerates, however. constitute 2.22 of the 400, the tenth largest single industry. and have no representative in the senior average. The next 10 S & P industrial groups constitute another 15 of the 400. Of these, Hospital Supplies, Forest Products. Soft Drinks, and Construction Machinery are unrepresented in the Dow. There is, of course. some question as whether the compilers of the Industrial Average really wish. or indeed should wish, to make it more similar to acapitalization-weight index than it currently is. It is worth noting, however, that such a task could easily be accomplished by removal of some of the smaller companies referred to above. and their replacement by major factors in the under-represented or un- represented industries. ANTHONY W. TABELL Dow-Jones Industrials (12 00 PM) 836.60 DELAFIELD, HARVEY, TABELL S & P Composite (1200 PM) 102.68 Cumulative Index (7/26/79) 767.62 AWTsla No stotement or expressIon of op'nion or any other molter hereIn contained IS, or IS to be deemed to be directly or ind,rectly, on offer or the sol,CitatIOn of on offer to buy or sell any referred to or menlloned The malter IS presented merely for the conVel'lenCE of the subscrIber While we belIeve the sources of our Informa- tIon 10 be reliable, we In no way represent or guarantee Ihe accuracy Ihereof nor of the stolements mude herem Any octlon to be loken by Ihe subscrIber should be based on h,s awn Invesllgotlan and InformatIon Janney Montgomery Scolt, Inc, as 0 corporatIon, ond Its officers or employees, may now hove, or may later toke, poslilons or trades ,respect to any seCUrltlE'S mentIoned In thIS or any future ISsue, and such POSitIOn may be dIfferent from any Views now or hereafter expressed II' thIS or ony other ISSIJI'l Janney Montgomery Scott, Inc, which IS regIstered WIth the SEC os on Investment adVisor, may gIve adVICe to Its Investment adVisory and olhet cuslomers Independently of ony stotements mode In Ihls or In any olher Issue F,Hther Informallon on ony securIty mentioned hereIn IS ava.lable on request