TABELL'S MARKET LETTER 909 STATE ROAD, PRINCETON, NEW JERSEY 08540 MEMBER NEW YORK STOCK EXCHANGE, INC MEMBER NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF SECURITIES DEALERS, INC (609) 924-9660 October 12, 1984 The recent short-term posltion of the general market remruns unchanged. From the fIrst of this f—mOiittheDow-JO;j-cs.!nduslMj\IAVFrngehis-spcnt-nioIjast-rwO'WlleJarbelow-ttre-clearly defiTedlnIl,,,,;t-…..,…. September trnding level of 1240-1190. closing at a recent low of 1175.13 on Tuesday of this week. then. the Dow hrts spent the remainder of the week trying to reverse thIS short-term, oversold downtrend. Lnst Febru.lrY in thIS letter we examined the record of the past malor-market cycles as we interpreted them from June. 1949 to dat and, in additIOn, suggested that a new cycle dId. In fact. begIn on August 12. 1982. Over SIX months IlUvc passed SInce that time and It IS mterestmg to reexamine the position of this current cycle WhICh we feel began over two years ago. The chart below shows the recent cycle with the major component swings in the S & P 500 from August, 1982 to date. Usmg a 10 filter, the high and low pomts are drawn to a uniform horizontal scale. The other data on the chart attempts to place. in perspective. the present cycle compared to the previous eight cycles mdentified. The horizontnl hnes drawn through the upper part of the chart show the length in trading days in each of these previous eIght cycles. UCLE. PlR) 00 ILOW-HIGH RDVRNCE) PERK CrCLE DATE 1–.g-); —-,—;–;;–,—c,.J1.96. 751 , JAN 1,,-,95,3 ('119.021 AUG 1956 1984 87 (-I 571 JUL 1984 147 82 OCl 1966 JUN A comparison of the length of these lines to the current cycle obVlously shows that each cycle has lasted a considerably longer period of time. The number of tradmg days 111 the current cycle is now 550 days old. This represents approximately 50 of the average length of the eight previous cycles (1053 days), and would indIcate approximately two years remaming In the present cycle. Cycles are measured fron low point to low pomt and a key questIon continues to be whether the high of October 10, 1983 constituted the peak for the current cycle. The relative times of the preVlous cycle peaks, again drawn to scale on the chart, are indicated by date and shows by the vertIcal tick marks on each of the cycle lengths. Again, It becomes apparent from the evidence presented in terms of relative length of time from cycle low to cycle peak that a possible further high could stIll be achieved. However, also shown on each cycle length is the percentage increase from cycle low to cycle peak. The recent percentage Increase of the S & P 500 from a cycle low to cycle peak is 68.57. ThIS increase 81though low in terms of the average advance of approximately 80 for the prevIOUS eight cycles has, in fact, already exceeded two previous periods, 1966-70 and 1978-82. It is interesting to note that the ilrst four cycles listed above reached their peak toward the end of their respective cycles while the last four cycles reached their peak toward the mIddle of their cycle length. What was dIfferent between the first four cycles and the last four cycles The fIrst four cycles occurred in a market enVIronment that was m a clearly defined cychcal long-term uptrend with an average annual inflation rate of under 2. The second group of four-year cycles occurred in an enVIronment which reflected a flat cyclical trend with an average annual inflation rate in excess of 7. It now becomes necessary for the market to accommodate the cycle theorist by postmg a new hIgh in the market. If this occurs, how the investor perceives the 10T'.g-term future of the market mIght give a c1ue to whether the cyc1e peaks 111 the middle of Its cycle, Le., flat cyclical trend, hIgh inflation rate. or toward the end of Its cycle. l.e . secular uptrend. low inflatIOn. Dow-Jones Industrials (1200 p.m.) 1195.23 S & P Composito (1200 p.m. 163.60 Cumulative Index (10/11/84) 2023.22 ROBERT J. SIMPKINS, JR. DELAFIELD, HARVEY, TABELL INC. No Slatment or O)fPISSlon 01 OPlhlOn or any other matter herem contained IS Of IS to be deemed to be dlrecHvor mdlrecHv, an oHer or the soliCitation 01 an alter to buy or sell any security referred to or mentioned lhe mailer IS presented merety forlhe conenl!nce 01 the subscnbr White we believe the sources 01 our mtormallon lObo roliable, we In no way represent or guarantee the accurac; thereof nor 01 Ihe statements made herein Any acllon 10 be taf-en bv the subscriber should be based on hiS own invesltgallon and information Delatleld Harvev, labelt fnc, as a corporallOn and Its oillce's 01 employees may now have or may laler lake POSlllonS Of trades In resi)e;t 10 any secUrities mentlOnea In thiS 01 any futule Issue, and such posillon maybe Oillerent Irom any views nowor hcreailer e(pressed In thiS 01 any olher ISSUO Delatleld, Harvey labelt Inc, which IS regIStered With the SEC as an Investment adVisor may give advice to ItS mvcstment adVIsory and other customers Independently 01 any statemonts made In this or In any other Issue Further mtormalion on any secuflly menlloned herein fs available on request

r TABELL'S MARKET LETTER 909 STATE ROAD, PRINCETON, NEW JERSEY 08540 MEMBER NEW YORK STOCK EXCHANGE, INC MEMBER NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF SECURITIES DEALERS, INC (609) 924-9660 . –;—. – 9ct9ber19.,1964. – – – – ofThe upside explosion WhICh fodk 'place late Thursday and eariY Frida)' was -typicaf the – – recent market environment, in which long periods of time doing nothing are interspersed with sharp moves to new price levels. As this is written, the market is testing its mid-September peako and ability to move above that peak would suggest a further test of last year's highs. Meanwhile, new highs have already been attained in a number of market sectors including. notably, utility stocks which, until Thursday, were just about the sole upside feature. We mean no disrespect to one of America's more conservative industries in mentioning the proverb about every dog having its day. However, it does appear partIcularly appropriate in the current instance of recent utility action. If one looks at the widely-followed market indicators, the past month had not been. until yesterday, a good one for the equity market. Both the Dow and the S & P attained their most recent highs just about a month ago, in mid-September. and, at lows posted 10 days ago, were down 5.04 and 4.26 respectively. Meanwhile, the Standard & Poor's utility index, which was at the 69. 92 level on the day the other averages made their nighs, closed last night at 74.46 for a 6! advance, having, in the process, moved ahead on 16 out of 23 trading days. One fact widely noted in the reports on this phenomenon was the fact that utilities were seI- ling at an 18-year high dating back to the time, as the Wall Street Journal pointed out, that ham- burger sold for 50 a pound. This is indeed true, since, to be precise, the last time the S & P utilities sold above last night's close was on January 18. 1966. It is. however, an instance of damning with faint praise. Almost all the other major market indicators achieved new alltime highs some years ago and subsequently moved well above. and. for the most part, remain well above, those previous peaks. The DowJones Industrials. for example, were, on January 18, 1966, at 994 ;20- versusoday's—–evel -of-over -1200. – —-7—–,-,…——-!—1 The furor, however, prompted us into some examination of the -record of utility' stocks over the period in question. The actual aIltime peak for the S & P Index, not yet exceeded, was on May 12, 1965 at a level of 78. 20.The most interesting sidelight to this figure is that thedividends for the index for the year 1965 was 2.49 . thus providing a yield of 3.18. To those accustomed to to- day's returns, this figure may seem almost microscopic, but it was, in fact, 70 of the yield pro- vided by AA Public Utility Bonds, which, at that time, were returning in the vicinity of 4.6. Interestingly enough, if one takes the current yield on utility stocks, around 8.9, we find that it is just about 70 of the yield available on AA Public Utility Bonds. We have, in other words, spent 19 long years in arriving back at the same place. How we got there, however, is interesting. The rationale, then as now, for the purchase of utility stocks was the fact that they were expected to provide a growing income stream, and this, indeed, they have done. Over 19 years to the third quarter of 1984, dividends on the S & P Index have increased from 2,45 to 6.48. They have. moreover. done so at an impressively steady rate working out to an annual increase of 5.25. The fact that price, for almost two decades, has done nothing in the face of steadily increasing dividends is. thus, purely and simply a function of in- creasing money rates over the two decades in question. What we find most interesting is the return to the same relationship to utility bonds that prevailed in 1965. Actually this relationship — utility commons yielding som 70 of the return available on senior securities — prevailed throughout the late 1960's. After wild swings during the early 1970's, it stabilized in the late 1970's at around 85 and has spent the 1980's coming down once more to the 70 level. Curiously, if one compute,s the 20-year discounted values of (a) a steady income stream and (b) an income stream which starts at 70 of the first one but increases at 51 annually, one finds that they are about the same. The investor in public utility commons and public utility bonds 19 years ago therefore wound up receiving about the same return. It was not a very good return, of course, but that is another story. One wonders if the prospects for the next two decades are not somewhat different. The rate of growth in utility dividends could slow of course, but, without making any forecast for long interest rates over the next 20 years. we doubt that they are going to triple, which is just about what they did over the last twenty. Under these conditions. the results for utility equity invest- ors. even with the stocks at the same level that marked their historic peak, could be improved over the dismal record for the 1965-1984 period. AWT rs ANTHONY W. TABELL DELAFIELD, HARVEY, TABELL INC. Dow-Jones Industrials (1200 p.m.) 1232.44 S & P Composite (1200 p.m.) 169.16 Cumulative Index (10/18.84) 2069.24 NO statement or e,,pfBSslon of opinion or any olhe' matter herein contained IS or IS to be deemed 10 be dlreclly or indirectly, an offer or the soliCitation 01 an offer to buy or sell any security reterred loor mentioned The matte/Is presented merely 101 the COfWenl(lnce of the subSCriber While we b1!lleve the sources 01 our mformahon to be reliable, we In no way represent 01 guarantee the accuracy lhoreof nor of the statements made herem Any aCIt!;m 10 be laken by the subscnber should be based on his own InvestigatiOn and mformatlon Dela/leld Harvey Tabell Inc as a corporation and Its officers or employees, may now have or may laler lake, pos/hons or trades In lespect 10 any seurllies menhonecl In thiS or any future Issue. nd such poslhon my be dlftarent from any vtews nawor he/ealler expressed In thiS or any other Issue Delatleld Harvey Tabeff tnc, which IS reglslered With the SEC as an Investment adVisor, maYQlveadvlce to ItS Investment adVISOry and Other customers Independently of any statements made m thIS or m any other Issue Further ,iormatlon on any security mentioned herem IS available on request

TABELL'S MARKET LETTER 909 STATE ROAD, PRINCETON, NEW JERSEY 08540 MEMBER NEW YORK STOCK EXCHANGE, INC MEMBER NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF SECURITIES DEALERS, INC. (609) 9249660 October 26, 1984 .– . We devoteLt)us leterlast week to adiscussion of the recent short-term strength in utility stocks and explored th-e flliTdain(iilf1iJlhitOri(trelationshlp tfinCh';s. seeme'dto7xjstbetweenthe-;YielQs ,n'those . stocks and the yields on the long-term bonds issued by the same utilities. Due to space iimitations, we' did not have the opportumty to discuss in any detail the current technical patterns for utility issues, a subject that is not. Ilt the moment. without interesting implications, both for the stocks themselves and for what the patterns appear to suggest regarding current market expectations — especially expectations In the nrea of interest rates. As we noted last week. most electric -utility issues reached their alltime highs sometime around 1965, highs which most lssues have yet to exceed. Following thelr achievement of tlrse highs, they essentially sat out two major bull markets, 1966-1968 and 1970-1973. This did not, however, prevent them from being full-dress participants in the 1973-1974 debacle. and, at the culmination of that downswing, most posted 20-year lows. A fairly sharp recovery from an extreme oversold position took place between 1974 and 1976,and the general pattern was one of a fair degree of resistence to the 1976-1978 bear market. After secondary lows in 1980. a strong recovery set in, and downside resistence to the 1981-1982 bear market was also demonstrated. At varymg times within recent years,most stocks have managed to move well ahead of highs scored in 1976. Most laggard issues that had not moved above their 1976 highs earlier have been able to do so on the recent strength. It lS not necessary to be an expert technician to realize that what we are talking about here are extensive bases, bases which, in the typical pattern, extend from 1973 to 1981, an eight-year period. During those eight years the price fluctuations have been extensive, and it is those price fluctuations which build up patterns suggesting the ultimate upside objectives of the bases. Those upside objectives are. to say the least, impressive. It is not uncommon to find utility stocks with long-term objectives (and here the qualifier, long term, must be emphasized) double and triple their current prices. About half of all utility lssues — here it is necessary to be selective — have penetrated most or all of the -overhead 'Supply-tnat-'exists fromothe 'originabtops-of-the-late-lc9601nd-ea..ly-le-pointed-out. last week that a relationship. however variable, has existed between utility yields and long-term interest rates. It is therefore hard to visualize utilities possessing the sorts of price patterns they now display without deducing therefrom market expectations, not only for lower, but for significantly lower, interest rates. This expectation would appear to be confirmed by the technical patterns for stocks in other interest-sensitive areas. There exists a fair number of bond-market experts who are currently presenting an eloquent case. on a fundamental basis, for what appears to be the market expectation. That is their field, not ours, and we happily leave It to them. We cannot. however, resist the observation that often consensus expert opinions are correct on the direction of a trend but conservative on that trend's extent. We would not be surprised if this were the current case. It is, of course, possible to base an argument for lower interest rates on the familiar 1!real-inter- est-rate theory. The September CPI report, released this week, carne up with its usual indication of inflation running around a 4 rate, and it is difficult at the moment to visualize any immediate change in this trend. Recent wage settlements seem well in line with potential productivity increases. and we are currently watching OPEC slowly come apart at the seams in a scenario that could have been lifted from t any first-year economics text. While a simpleminded relationship between inflation and interest rates has. in our view, been thoroughly dlscredited, it is certainly hard to see inflationary expectations providing any upward stimulus for money rates. One can base the expectation of lower rates on nothing more than observation of long-term history. Interest rates have historically moved in long cycles, and those cycles have peaked at levels at or below the rates that have prevailed for the past four or five years. To one who has observed interest rates long enough, figures signiflcantly lower than current ones are hardly unthinkable. We walked into this industry as a callow youth 30 years ago and found a yield curve running from it to 3.. which everyone seemed to consider- perfectly ,normal. From this perspective. we find nothing unusual a!tu!. rates a 4 great deal lower than those currently prevailing. Quite obvlously, if the market expectation (and our reading of it) is correct, the financial environment will be greatly changed. As one example, interest payment constitutes some 70 of the current federal deficit, about which everyone, in this preelection period, appears to be concerned. Although the precise nature of the relationship can be questioned J we are certainly willing to accept some portion of the conventional wisdom regarding lower lnterest rates being bullish for stock prices. In any case. based on the apparent current market picture. we must count ourselves in the bullish camp as far as the long- term interest-rate outlook is concerned. AWT rs ANTHONY W. TABELL DELAFIELD, HARVEY, TABELL INC. Dow-Jones Industrials (1200 p.m.) S & P Composlte (12.00 p.m.) Cumulative Index (10/25/84) 1207.16 165.26 2070.22 No statement or expression of opinion or any other matter herem contained Is, or 1 to be deemed to be, directly or Indirectly, an oHer or the sollcltallon of an oHerto buyer sell any secunty referred to or mentioned The mattor Is presented merely for Ihe convenience olthe subSCriber While we believe the sources of ourmlormallon to be reliable, we In no way represenl or guaranteelhe accuracy thereol nor 01 the statements made herem Any acllon to be taken by the subSCriber should be based on hiS own mvestlgahon and mformatlOn Delafield Harvey laben tnc as a corporafion and Its otllcers or employees, may now haye, or may later take, pOSItions or trades In respect to any securities mentlonea m thiS or any future Issue nd such position my be dlflerent hom any Ylews now or hereafter expressed In this or any other Issue Delafield, Harvey, labell Inc, which IS registered Wllh Ihe SEC as an InVell\ment adlsor, may glyeadYlce to Its Investment ad..lsory and other customers Independently 01 any statements made In thiS or In any other Issue FUher mformatlon on any security mentioned herem IS a..allab\e on request

'\ TABELL'S MARKET ….. H.' LETTER 909 STATE ROAD. PRINCETON, NEW JERSEY 08540 MEMBER NEW YORK STOCK EXCHANGE, INC MEMBER NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF SECURITIES DEALERS, INC (609) 924-9660 November 2, 1984 Symmetry is a not uncommon feature of stock-market patterns, The Dow, it will be recalled, ,made its high almost a year ago, at 1287.20, and dropped sharply to 1134 in February. That low constituted the' bottom,lof a -trading – rangew-Iiich-lii.sted fOUr monthsand- waslinally -broKen- in-April'. ' . Then, unexpectedly. the rally in August of this year moved the Dow back through that trading range and almost to the previous high. However, the rally attempt failed some 50 points under the November peak. the most recent high being 1237.52 on September 14. On a much smaller scale, an- other trading range was then formed between1175 and 1200. The subsequent rally attempt in mid- October fruled just under the September high at around 1225. Despite the surface negativity of this pattern of lower peaks, there has been, since the mar- ket reached its hIgh in mid-September, some pattern of underlying improvement. This improvement can be seen in breadth figures. For example, if one cumulates the advice-decline difference since September 18, the day the market started down, one finds that it has returned almost to its start- ing point despite the fact the market was, in September, 20 points higher and indeed, the cumula- tive a /d figure was actually plus when the Dow was at 1225 two weeks ago. It is possible, by ana- lyzing some 9000 days of trading, to arrive at a normal or expected figure for both advances and declines, given the change in the Dow. We have set out in the following table the actual and ex- pected figures for each of the breadth components since September 18. The figures show fairly clearly that breadth on most days has turned out somewhat better than the normal expectation. DJIA A d van c e s Dec 1 1 n e sUn c h e d Cumulative Date F't Ch Act. Ex. Dlff. Act. Ex. Diff. Act. Exp. Diff. Act. Exp. SEF' 18 -10.82 SEF' 19 -13.25 687 559 128 77B 499 279 851 1048 -197 478 409 69 -164 -4B9 B04 1097 -293 419 405 14 -190 -10B7 SEP 20 3.53 SEP 21 -14.BO B68 877 -9 731 464 267 71B 731 -16 437 412 25 -40 -944 832 1137 -305 443 405 38 -I'll -1617 SEF' 24 3.32 576 861 -285 947 72B 219 472 406 66 -512 -14B4 SfP 25 2.10 649 835 -186 900 756 144 450 408 42 -763 -1405 SSEEFP' 26 27 44..6964938034- 897 877 -63 -53- 694 –5B1- 692 690 2 1'0-8- – 445608-4'4O0'7l-S5-6-1—'-2672'35–,1I2,0O-0I–I–. SEP 28 -10.05 658 556 102 872 1005 -133 427 396 31 -489 -1462 OCT 1 -7.73 458 612'-154 1101 967 134 422 402 20 -1132 -1817 OCT 2 -7.62 530 614 -84 926 967 -41 528 403 125 -1528 -2170 OCT 3 -8.50 496 598 -102 1057 997 60 448 406 42 -2089 -2569 OCT 4 4.53 786 876 -90 690 689 1 490 401 89 -1993 -2382 OCT 5 -4.86 769 667 102 691 898 -207 504 399 105 -1915 -2613 OCT 8 -4.64 517 648 -131 B41 861 -20 535 384 151 -2239 -2B26 OCT 9 -2.76 6BO 722 -42 794 B62 -68 514 404 110 -2353 -2966 OCT 10 2.10 711 B23 -112 7B5 743 42 471 401 70 -2427 -2BB6 nCT 11 5.B5 977 910 67 540 662 -122 458 403 55 -1990 -263B OCT 12 7.62 1067 960 107 4B4 630 -146 447 40B 39 -1407 -230B OCT 15 12.26 1019 1060 -41 550 527 23 427 409 IB -93B -1775 OCT 16 -5.19 743 675 6B 819 922 -103 443 408 35 -1014 -2022 OCT 17 -1.88 777 751 26 771 850 -79 462 409 53 -1008 -2121 OCT 18 29.49 1264 1462 -198 433 150 283 334 419 -85 -177 -809 OLT 19 23OCT OCT 0.55 -8.73 -4.19 1079 827 252 694 606 88 787 703 84 618 817 -199 859 1008 -149 767 904 -137 367 420 -53 471 410 61 463 410 53 284 -799 119 -1201 139 -1402 OCT 24 3.42 757 880 -123 807 741 66 472 415 57 89 -1263 UCT 25 -5.41 612 676 -64 946 932 14 459 409 50 -245 -1519 OCT 26 -6.07 490 657 -167 1050 941 109 465 407 58 -805 -1803 UCT 29 -3.54 598 710 -112 904 882 22 495 405 90 -1111 -1975 OCT 30 15.90 1083 1157 -74 500 457 43 447 416 31 -528 -1275 OCT 31 -9.93 744 578 166 821 1037 -216 461 411 50 -605 -1734 NOV 1 9.70 1027 1006 21 546 590 -44 434 411 23 -124 -1318 Especially significant is the fact that the number of declining stocks has, since September, generally turned out to be considerably lower than expected. For example, on September 21, with a 14. SO-point decline in the Dow, 1137 declines would have been normal. There were only 832. On 13 of the 33 days under study, the number of declining issues was more than 100 fewer than expected. Also interesting is the relatively large number of stocks that have managed to remain unchang- ed. On only two of the 33 days has the number of unchanged issues been less than one would normally expect. All this lends some credence to the belief that the ultimate resolution of the current impasse will be on the upside, perhaps even, in the process, erasing the breadth divergence which has ex- isted since mid-summer of last year. In any case, it will be worth continuing to watch breadth action closely. Dow-Jones Industrials (12'00 p.m.) 1220.07 S & P Composite (1200 p.m,) 167.35 Cumulative lndex (11/1/84 2074.27 ANTHONY W. TABELL DELAFIELD, HARVEY, TABELL INC. NOTE In keeping with this letter's quadrennial tradition of predicting the result of the Presidential election, we forecast the reelection of President Reagan, No statement or e. pression 01 opinion or any other matter herein Contained IS or IS 10 be deemed to be directly or Indlrectlv, an oller or the soliCitation of an offer to bu) or sell any security re1crred tOOl mentioned The matler IS presented merely lor the con\lenlcnce of Ihe subscriber While we believe the sources 01 our Information to be reliable, we In noway represent or guaranteetne accuracy Ihereol nor 01 the statements made herOin Any aellon \0 be tal-en bv Ihe subSCriber should be based on hiS own Investigation and information Delafield, Harvey, Tabell Inc, as a corporation ilno liS ofllcer, or omployeo may now I'ilve, or may liller tal-.(. pOSitions or trades In respecll0 any securities menlloned In thIS or any future Issue, and such poslilon may be diliment from any views nowor hO!l;afler c1pmssd In thiS or any olher Issue Delafield Harvey labell Inc whiCh IS reglslered With Ihe SECas an Investment adVisor, may give adVice 10 ItS mves/mlml adVisory and ollwr customcrs mocpeno8nlly 01 any Sla/ements made m thiS or many o/het Issue Further mlormallon on any socumy mentIOned herem IS avaIlable on reQuest

TABELL'S MARKET LETTER 909 STATE ROAD. PRINCETON, NEW JERSEY 08540 MEMBER NEW YORK STOCK EXCHANGE, INC MEMBER NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF SECURITIES DEALERS, INC (609) 924-9660 November 9, 1984 ed to Eleclion l'esults-re now in, and we are' the conventional election-year pattern. cBlaossiec-atlol-yd, isict'osveeerminsg-hoto w well–1-984 too far out willhaveconform- of line. With today's market level fairly close to' the 1983 close, the year appears unlikely to be a severe bear- market one. a statement whiCh has been true of all but three of the past 21 election years. Even more typically, the Dow is likely to end the year above the June average price of 1110.37, which conforms to the notable tendency toward strength in the second half. One way in which it did not conform was in the proclivity, which we pointed out early this year, for weakness through April to suggest a change in administrations. Such weakness indeed occurred, but it did not bother Mr. Reagan. In the spirit of looking ahead, we have produced the following table which indicates how the stock market did in the 22 most recent years after an election. Like our usual election-year table, it shows the average price for each month on the Dow as a percentage of the previous December's close (i.e . 110 means the market was up 10; 90 means it was down 10). Year President ———- 1897 1901 1905 Cleveland Mcllinle, Roosevelt 1909 Taft 1913 Wl1son – – 1917 W11 son —–t-921–Ha-r d 1-ns 1925 CoolidSe 1929 Hoover 1933 Roosevelt 1937 Roosevelt 1941 Roosevelt 1945 Roosevelt 1949 1953 1957 1961 1965 Truman Eisenhower Eisenhower I\enned, Johnson 1969 Nixon 1973 1977 1981 Nlon Carter Reagan Jan Feb Mar Apr Ma, Jun Jul Ami Sep Oct Nov Il .. c D 84 82 82 79 R 96 97 97 104 R 101 106 112 115 R 99 97 97 101 D 97 92 91 92 l 10'2 96 100 99 R-I-04-105-104-107- R 101 100 100 99 R 102 103 103 103 l 103 92 96 111 D 101 105 104 99 D 98 92 93 92 D 101 103 103 105 l 101 99 99 99 R 99 98 98 94 R 97 93 94 97 D 102 105 109 111 l 101 102 102 104 R 99 98 97 99 R 100 D 97 R 101 95 93 93 94 94 93 99 103 104 79 85 92 104 107 101 95 98 101 109 104 101 99 92 93 89 107 108 114 117 115 118 123 134 105 107 110 it4 114 114 114 114 90 85 BEl 91 93 90 BB B8 – -98 10'2 98 93 88 83 75 -107 – 9-6- 95………93 9.b l00J05 74 .U.1 104 107 111 115 118 125 128 1-28 103 105 114 120 11 97 76 82 139 157 164 165 166 153 159 165 96 95 99 102 89 78 69 ,,9 89 92 96 97 97 93 89 85 109 109 108 110 117 121 124 126 97 93 97 101 102 105 108 111 94 91 '13 9 B9 93 95 96 100 101 103 98 94 89 88 88 112 112 112 117 115 114 117 118 106 100 100 102 10 108 109 109 101 96 89 87 87 8B BEl 83 90 88 89 87 90 95 87 80 92 91 90 87 B5 82 EI; 81 102 103 98 95 89 89 90 91 The most obvious conclusion suggested by the table is, unfortunately, that such years appear to have a fairly significant bearish bias. In 13 of the 22 years, the average price for December was lower than the previous December's close. This is in direct contrast with the record for all years since 1897. The market was up in 52 of those 87 years, or 60 of the time, thus sug- gesting that the post-election pattern is a bit unusual. Nor does Mr. Reagan's party affiliation help. The market has been down in the year following the election of a Republican in every post-election year since Hoover. (This bias was apparently not present in the first part of the century, with the accessions of Theodore Roosevelt, Taft, Harding, and Coolidge all producing good years.) Based on what we currently perceive to be good market action we are not sure how much weight should be given to the above table, especially as far as the first half' of 1985 is concerned. Nonetheless, it is worth keeping in mind. AWTrs ANTHONY W. TABELL DELAFIELD, HARVEY, TABELL INC. Dow-Jones Industrials (1200 p.m.) 1231. 78 S & P Composite (1200 p.m.) 169.10 Cumulative Index (11/8184) 2100.45 No statemerll or Brpresslon of opinion or flny otl1er matter herein contamoo IS, or IS to be deemed to be directly or Indirectly, an offer or the soircltallOn of an oller to buy or sell any secUrity referred 10 or mentioned The matter IS presented merelv for the convenience of the subSCriber While we believe the sources of our rnlormatlon 10 be reliable, we In no way represent or guarantee the accuracy thereof nor of the stateml'nlS made herein corporallon and Its oilicersor employees maf nON Any have action to be liJken or may later lahl, by the subSCriber pOSitions or Irade s s ho In uld be based on hiS own investig respect to any seCUrities mentio ation and ned In \hl mtormal10n D sor any future eIslasfuiee,ldnHdasrvuecyh Tabe)) Inc as a position may be different from any ews now or hewalter e)(presscd In this or my olher Issue Delafield Harvey Tabell Inc, which 15 registered With the SEC as an Investmflnt adVisory and other customers Indflpendently of any statemonls m ..de 10 thiS or In any other Issue Furlhflr mformatlon on any securltv Investment mentioned haedrVeisinorImavaayiglalvbflleaodnvlrceflqtuoelsist

TABELL'S MARKET LETTER , ,. 909 STATE ROAD, PRINCETON, NEW JERSEY 08540 MEMBER NEW YORK STOCK EXCHANGE, INC MEMBER NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF SECURITIES DEALERS, INC (609) 924,9660 November 16, 1984 With the ma,rket si!1king toward tile 1200 level again this week, it is interesting to recall that the Dow first crossed that, figure in April, 1983, 19'months ago. -Allof the' trading since that-time has' been within a range of roughly 100 points on either side of 1200, and the bulk of it has been in a range of plus or minus 50.0 This has led to a complex pattern, still not fully resolved, which is deline- ated on the Joint uuu ,'fl ,.Jre chart below I, II IT Uel,' ' ,, hnw;n , on Dow. – – 0. Following the first 1200 crossing of April, 1983, the average remained between 11 0 an. 1250 until mid-July (A), breaking down to reach the 1160 level in August. This downside breakout, as has been the case in a fair number of recent instances, proved to be false. The Dow moved up again in the late summer and fall of 1983, in the process attaining its closing high to date of 1287.20 on November 29. In the process of attaining that high, a new trading range, this one between 1220 and 1290 (B), was traced out. The 1290 high was tested for the second time in January of this year, following which the Dow promptly broke below 1220 in February. Unlike the previous breakout, this one was real. A low of 1120 was attained in February with little in the way of upside interruption. Thlo top at (B) had an indicated downside objective of 1095, and, for a while, it looked as if it might not be attained. The average was able to hold above the 1120 low through July, but broke at that point and reached the 1090 level no fewer than three times. It was, however, able to make little in the way of upside progress, repeatedly being turned back at 1130 by the overhead supply created by most of the first half-year's trading (D). With the most plausible objective of the 1983 top having been reached, the configuration at (C-D) began to resemble a so-called fulcrum base, as noted at the time. This was confirmed by the straight-line rise to the 1220 level last August. The upside objective of this base was and remains in the 1350-1380 range. . Subsequent to the August rally the Dow has onCe more been able to make little progress, hav- ing been turned back at 1240 four times since then, the most recent case being just last week. It seems obvious that the indicator now finds itself wedged, at (E), between the heavy overhead supply at (B) and the support from the original base at (e), support which turned back the short-lived downthrust of early October. /7 ' C – 0- As we noted above, the pattern remains unresolved. The downside objective of the 1290-1220 top has been reached and, if this is the correct downside reading, one would suspect that the 1350-1380 upside target mentioned above is correct. If, on the other hand all trading at (A-B) is to be regarded as a top, the overhead supply should prevail, and a move back to or through the lows of early 1984 would not be out of the question. As we have noted, we think the market's improving internal condition and the number of bullish individual stock patterns suggest an upside resolution. This, however, will not be confirmed until, first 1240, and then 1290, are penetrated. AWTrs ANTHONY W. TAB ELL DELAFIELD, HARVEY, TAB ELL INC. Dow-Jones Industrials (12 00 p. m.) S & P Composite (1200 p.m.) CumUlative Index (11 115 184) 1204.06 165.96 2075.76 NO statement or e..-presslOn 01 opinion or any other matter herom contamed IS or IS to be deemed to be dlreclly or mdlrectly. an olfer or the soliCitation of an offer to buy or sell any secunty referred tOOf mentioned The mailer IS presonled merely forthe convenl(mceollhesubscnber While we believe the sources of our information to berellabte we Inno way represent or guarantee the accuracy thereof nor of the statoments made herein Any action to be laken by the subscriber shoutd be based on his own investigation and information Delafield Harvoy TaOOIl Inc as a corporation and Its offlc(lrs or employees may now have, or may later take, pOSitIOns or trades in respect to any secuntles mentioned In thiS or any future Issue nd such POSition my be dillereni from any views nowor hereafter expressed m thiS or any olherlssue Delalreld Harvey labell Inc which IS registered With the SECas an mvestment advisor, may 91ve advice to liS mvestment adVISOry and other customers rndependently 01 any statements made m thiS or In any other Issue Further mformatlon on any secunty mentioned herem IS available on request .,

TABELL'S MARKET LETTER 909 STATE ROAD, PRINCETON, NEW JERSEY 08540 MEMBER NEW YORK STOCK EXCHANGE, INC MEMBER NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF SECURITIES DEALERS, INC (609) 9249660 — ,, Noy'e!'1.er23, 1984 We noted last week that the Dow had spent 'the monthsof-'A-ugust to'.Novemoer wedgea'oe ;'– tween overhead supply at approximately 1240 and support at around the 1170-1180 area. It has been turned back by the supply once in each of the four months with closing highs of 1239.73 on August 21, 1237.52 on September 14, 1225.93 on October 19, and 1244.15 on November 6. The bottom of the range has been defined by two downward thrusts, to 1175,13 on October 9 and, so far, to 1185.29 on Monday. We have made an effort to examine the action of individual stocks during this period. sur- veying the price action of 2197 issues, 1242 on the NYSE, 227 on the ASE, and 728 Over-The- Counter. The individual stocks made their highs in each of the four months as shown in the fol- lowing table. Month of High August September October November Number Number Number Number NYSE 407 33 246 2'0 251 2'0 338 27 ASE 96 43 63 27 34 15 34 15 OTC 318 44 153 21 117 16 140 19 Total 821 38 462 21 402 18 512 23 The table shows some evidence of internal deterioration, which had best not go unchecked if the market is going to continue to make upside progress, Thirty-eight percent of all issues made their highs in August and have not been able to move ahead to new highs since. The table also shows relatively poor performance on the part of secondary stocks. Both the ASE and OTC sectors have demonstrated a progressively smaller number of new highs as the period has worn on. The NYSE, however, was able to show some recent improvement, with more stocks being able to each-c-!lewhigh-in,-November…thanJILeither….s.ep.temb'-'e'-'ro'-'r'–'Oc-'tobe'-'ri.c—,-.—-.–;;7.—-c;-..,.'1 The same disparityis evident -if one observes -ffie month of the low for tile perioa in each sector, Most NYSE issues made their lows in October or before, and only a quarter of them have gone on to new lows in November so far, On the AMEX and OTC, however, November has seen a larger number of new lows than any previous month. Month of Low August September October November Number Number NYSE 247 2'0 266 Number 21 433 Number 35 296 24 ASE 37 16 33 15 63 28 94 41 OTC 129 18 101 14 211 Total 413 19 400 18 707 29 287 39 32 677 31 Secondary stocks have also, by and large, corrected more than the NYSE universe. The average decline from the high, whenever made, to the subsequent low has been 15.2 on the NYSE. For AMEX issues it was 22.9 and for OTC stocks 24.6. Those 318 OTC issues that reached their highs in August have subsequently declined, on average, 33.7, just about one-third. If one takes Monday's close as a reference point, one discovers that the average recovery of the loss from the August-November high to the subsequent low has been rather small. The av- erage issue, as of Monday, had recovered about 20 of that loss. It is interesting that this figure appears fairly consistent across all exchanges and regardless of the month in which the high was made. The bulk of stocks seem, during the August-November period, to have undergone a notable correction and to remain in the bottom portion of the corrective range. Our study, in summary, shows some attempt at probing for a bottom on the New York Stock Exchange at least, with a fair number of issues having been able, so far, to hold above their August-October lows and recover modestly. Further market strength at this,juncturehold-c ing down the number of new lows scored in November, will be bullish, at least for the serlior sector. However, noticable deterioration, despite the flat trend of the averages seems to be con- tinuing on the American Stock Exchange and Over-The-Counter. ' AWTrs ANTHONY W. TAB ELL DELAFIELD, HARVEY, TAB ELL INC. Dow-Jones Industrials (1200 p.m.) 1213.00 S & P Composite (1200 p.m.) '.16586 Cumulative Index (11/21/84) 2052.76 No S1atemenl or expression 01 opinion or any other matter herem contained IS, or ,s to be deemed to be dlrectty or mdlrectly an offer or the sohclla1l0n of an oller to buyor sell any security referred 10 or mentIoned The matter IS presented merely for the convenience 01 the subscriber While we believe the sources of our mformatlon 10 be reliable, we In no way represent or guarantee the accuracy thereof nor 01 the statements made herem Any action to be taken bylhe subSCriber should be based on hiS own Investigation and Information Delafield, Harvey, labell tnc, as a corporation and lis officers or employees, may now have, or may laler take. pOSitions or trades In respect to any secuntles mentioned In thiS or any future Issue, and such pOSlllon may be dlfferenllrom any VIOWS now or Mlealter opressed In Ihls or any other Issue Delafield Harvey label! fnc which IS registered wIth the SECas an Investment adVisor, may give advice to Its Investment adVisory and other customers Independently 01 any slalemcnls made In thiS or In any other Issue Further Informal Ion on any securlly mentioned herein IS available on request .—'

———- TABELL'S MARKET LETTER 909 STATE ROAD, PRINCETON, NEW JERSEY 08540 MEMBER NEW YORK STOCK EXCHANGE, INC MEMBER NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF SECURITIES DEALERS. INC (609) 9249660 -,.. November 30, 1984 – The.-(e9tureor'Hleeek'sfina.n.ciarn-ewsas the- -Treasury taxreformproposal–ana'-t1ie Iffipres-io-n—- – – gained from the published response thereto was that it turned out to be a monumental lead balloon, pos- sibly because almost everybody's pet ox appeared to be gored somewhere in the process. This was curi- oue, since the tax reform impetus is hardly new. The President made it a keystone for his campaign, bills bearing the imprimatur of both political parties (Kemp-Kasten and Bradley-Gephardt) have been around for Borne time, and the Treasury study is simply a more detailed synthesis with the same thrust. In light of the cool reaction, one wonders why reform has gained as much momentum as it has. The reason is summarized in the first paragraph of the Treasury proposal. The present U.S. tax system desparately needs simplification and reform. It is too complicated, it is unfair, and it retards savings, investment, and economic growth. Essentially, one either believes that statement or one doesn't. We tend to believe it. Reduced to their essence, current proposals can be viewed as a practical triumph for one of the basic tenets of supply-side economics. That tenet stresses the economic disincentives of high marginal tax rat es, and the unifying tiane of all existing reform proposals is that those rates are reduced — to a 35 personal maximum in the Treasury offering, lower in Bradley-Gephardt and Kemp-Kasten. The fundamental distinction that needs to be made in understanding the proposals is between average and marginal tax rates. Since the proposals are theoretically IIrevenue-neutral. the average percentage of total Income paid for a given tax-paying entity will change hardly at all. This legerdemain is accompli- shed by eliminating a mare's nest of former deductions and taxing the resultant higher income at a lower rate. The resuit Is that the potential value of an additional dollar of income earned is, due to that lower rate. increased. Now, revenue-neutral is a totally theoretical concept. It means that if the proposed changes were applied to the existing Income structure, total tax revenues would remain the same. The point is that, once a change is enacted economic decisions, are made on the basis of that change. An additional dollar of income under the Treasury proposal will be worth 65, 30 more than it is worth under current law and 116 more than it was worth a few years ago when a 70 marginal rate existed. IEleme,n;;t;ary.;eco– –T\nom1cs–nms us thBtsucn an -mcentive favors …tnecreation ofaaaitiOiliiltncome or,-'in'other words, eco- nomic growth. The basic argument in favor of reform is. really. no more complicated than that. Many of the specifics of the proposed legislation, especially those that relate, directly or indirectly, to the stock market can be understood in terms of incentives. The basic corporate tax rate is like that for individuals, reduced sharply from 46 to 33. As an offset, the Investment Tax Credit and the Ac- celerated Cost Recovery System, two of the most conspicuous economic miscarriages of current tax legis- lation J are removed. These were originally band aid proposals to compensate business for its inability to recover replacement costs of assets in an inflationary environment. The economic life of an asset, how…. ever, cannot be fixed by legislation. In practice both ACRS and ITC have simply turned out to be sub- sidies to those businesses investing heavily in capital equipment. The effect has been to make such in- vestment f in many cases , a tax decision rather than an economic decision. It is the restoration of eco,, nomic incentives that is the thrust of reform proposals. Other features of direct concern to investors are the taxation of capital gains at (lower) ordinary in- come rates and, perhaps, more important, the partial deductabllity to corporations of dividend payments, a step, at least, In the direction of eliminating the Ion g-established double taxation of the corporate In- come stream. This Is a direction which we have long approved. It has always been our feeling that capital investment decisions should be subject to the discipline of the market place. Current tax law has always provided an incentive for corporate reinvestment in decaying industries. The proposed changes would tend to force more income into the hands of investors who could then make their own decisions regarding reinvestment rather than having those decisions made for them by corporate management. It has been argued (see George Gilder on the op-ed page of today's Wall Street Journal) that placing the same economic value on a dollar of interest or dividend income and a dollar of capital gain will be a deterrent to investment in smaller companies where rewards J traditionally have been reaped in the latter form. We are not so sure that this is the case. It seems to us that an incentive for venture capital in- vestment has always been in the potential size of the returns rather than their nature. That potential, it seems to us, will remain. We have presented above arguments in favor of tax simplification simply by way of indicating our be- lief that some species of reform, however altered in the political process is likely to be implemented, de- spite the anguished howls that emerged from all sides this week. As that implementation becomes closer, investment decisions are, quite obviously. going to have to be made in this light. Overall. however. we believe reform will improve. rather than c1oud,the investment climate. AWTrs ANTHONY W. TAB ELL DELAFIELD, HARVEY, TAB ELL INC. Dow-Jones Industrials (12 00 p.m.) 1190.81 S & P Composite (1200 p.m.) 163.84 CumUlative Index (11/29/84) 2053.61 No statement or expression 01 opinion or any other malter herein contained IS or IS to be deemed to be, directly or Indirectly, M offer or the soliCitation of an offer to buy or sell any secunty referred to or mentioned The mailer IS presented merely for the convenlenceoi theubscnber While we beheve the soorces of oor information to be reliable we in no way represent orguarantel'! the ilccuracy Ihereol nor of the corporallon and Its of/lcers statements made herein 01 employees, may now Any have action to be taken or may later lake, by the subscriber Should be positions or lrades In respe based on hiS own Investigation ctlo any seculltles mentioned I nanthdiSInofroarnmylfIuotnureDeIslasfuieeldnHdasrvuecyh lPaObSeitliionInmc different from any views now or h!lIealter e.opressed In thiS or any other Issue Delafield Harvey Tabell Inc which IS registered With tile SECas an Investment adVisory and other customers Independently 01 any statements made In thiS 01 In any ottler Issue Further InformatIOn on any secunty Investment mentioned haedrelisnorImavaayilgaibveleaodnvlrceqeutOett S

TABELL'S MARKET LETTER 909 STATE ROAD, PRINCETON, NEW JERSEY 08540 MEMBER NEW YORK STOCK EXCHANGE, INC MEMBER NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF SECURITIES DEALERS, INC (609) 9249660 -'-'-, .-.,—– o- ….. ;. – . De-cetn1Jel'-7–1'984 – – ——– The market contInued lt8 post-election slIde to new lows this week, -;Xth 'Thursday'S closIng low of 1170.49 constJtuting tw lowest level It Wh1Ch the Dow had closed since early August. exceed- ing the mId-October low by some five points. As we documented with a chart in this space three weeks ago. the conventIonal readIng of the August-November tradIng range as a top has some fairly negative lmplIcations. Mmimnlly. a move deep into the early 1984 support, to 1130, would be sug- gested. and a move to below thot support, to 1030, would not be out of the question. There is some basIs. however, for questioning the conventIonal reading. The November- December drop has been the thIrd short-term decline since the mnrket reached its hIgh in August. Each of these dechnes has started around the same level, approximately 1240, each has moved mar- ginally lower than the low of the previous one. and each has been some three-four weeks in dura- tion. The volume on each of the last two drops has diminished considerably from that of the pre- vious rallying phase and has been signIficantly lower than the average (90.1 millIon shares daily) before the declme began. ThIS pattern, a series of short-term declines achieVIng margInal new lows, IS not without precedent m recent market history. The relevant flgures are shown in the table below followed by two sets of figures WIth eerie similarity. Each case showed three short-term declines startIng from around the snme level and achIeving new lows. Each declIne showed lower volume than had been seen on the previous rally. For the most part, the length of each decline was about the same as in the current case. Decline No. Average Daily Vol. High- Declme of Milhon Shares High Aug 21. 1984 1239.73 , –Sepl.4-;l'98'1—-I237'52 Low Sep ll. 1984 ll97.99 Ocr-90'98 11'75713 Low -3.4 5-1) Low-Low Days Decline Prev.Rallx –rr- 78.5 1791l'88-1—-l'O8 Nov 6, 1984 1244.15 Dec 6, 1984 1170.49 -5.9 -0.4 21 82.3 9R.1 – -, Mar 16, 1984 ll84.36 Apr 5, 1984 1l30.55 -4.6 14 83.9 May 2, 1984 ll86.56 Jun 15. 1984 1086.90 -8.4 3.8 31 84.5 July 3, 1984 ll34.28 July 24, 1984 1086.57 -4.2 -0.1 14 72.2 87.0 87.2 Jan 29, 1982 May 7, 1982 Jun 20, 1982 871.10 869.20 833.43 Mar 8, 1982 Jun 18, 1982 Aug 12, 1982 795.47 788.62 776.92 -8.7 -9.3 -6.8 -0.9 -1. 5 25 29 17 54.7 49.0 51. 6 53.7 55.3 As the dates make apparent, the two previous cases trace the market's history just prior to the rally of August, 1984 and to the start of the bull market in August, 1982. In both these prior Instances a period of relative torpor with the market mOVIng to new lows on light volume was followed by what was, at the time, an hlstorically unprecedented upside explosion. It should be most emphatically noted that no prediction of a similar upside explosion is being made in the present instance. Certainly a major dlfference between the past four months and the prior two periods shown is the fact that the current weakness is taking place after a fairly sharp rally while the last two cases have occurred following market declines. It is, however, an undeniable fact that, over the past few years, moves to new lows, especially on light volume, have not see(ned to produce the followthrough they once had. Moreover, despite the fact that there exist individual issues, including some major ones, WIth top patterns SImilar to those of the averages. a significant number of other Issues appear to possess limited vulnerabihty, either showIng no top formation at all or finding themselves already severely depressed after previous sharp declines. There appears therefore, some Justification for feeling that the downside objectives suggested by a conventional reading of the pattern In the averages may not materialize or that, at least, a goodly number of stocks will be able to demonstrate reSIstance to any weakness which may occur in the major market indices.. ANTHONY W. TAB ELL DELAFIELD, HARVEY, TABELL INC. AWT rs Dow-Jones Industrials (12' 00 p. m. ) 1172.70 S & P Composlte (1200 p.m. 163.17 Cumulative Index (12/6/84) 2033.54 No statement or expression of opinion or any other matter herein contained IS, or IS 10 be deemed to be, directly or indirectly, an oller or the solicitation of an oHer to buy Of self any security referred 10 or mentioned The matter IS presented merely/or lhe convenience of the subscriber While we believe the sources olour Information lobe reliable, we In no way represent or guarantee the accuracy thereof nor of the statements made herein Any action to be talen by the suoscrtber should be based on his own Investigation and Inlormatlon Dela!ield, Harvey, Tabell Inc, as a corporation and rts officers or employees may now have, or may later take pOSItions or trades In respect to any seCUrities mentioned In thiS or any future Issue, and such position may be different from any views flOW or hereafter expressed In thiS or any other Issue Oelalleld, Harvey TaOOIl Inc which IS registered with the SEC as an Investment adVisor, may give adVice to Its Investment adVISOry and other customers mdependen\ly of any statements made In thiS or In any other Issue Furlher Information on any se-cuflty mentioned herein IS available on request

TABELL'S MARKET LETTER 909 STATE ROAD, PRINCETON, NEW JERSEY 08540 MEMBER NEW YORK STOCK EXCHANGE, INC MEMBER NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF SECURITIES DEALERS, INC (609) 9249660 – , – – —– – — H D..eSl1beJ;11… JJ)B4 .;Ea It! ..,…..- T-he-year-end rally,- a phenomenon we have discussed with some frequency in this space, has certainly not materialized to date, the slide from Election Day having continued through this week. That rally, as we have pointed out, has often been so short as to almost escape notice, but it is nonetheless real, as eVldenced by the market's pronounced seasonal upward bias for the month of December, as shown at the table at right. Months Months Months Months The table covers the 88 years Month U1 Down Up Change since the Dow was first computed in 54 -l3 62.07 O. a755 1897 and. for each month, shows the Feb. 41 47 46.59 -0.4982 number of months the market was up Mar. 52 36 59.09 0.6896 and down, the percentage of months April 49 39 55.68 0.9173 up, and the average percent change May 42 46 47.73 -0.4933 for each month. An upward tend- June 44 44 50.00 0.5751 ency in December is clearly July 54 34 61.36 1.4620 noticable. Although on average Aug. 59 28 67.82 1. 7879 the market moved ahead in Sept. 36 51 41. 38 -1.2645 only 56 of the 1050 months Oct. 47 40 54.02 0.0250 under study, 71 of all Decembers Nov. 52 35 59.77 0.7185 were upward months. The average Dec. 62 25 71.26 1.2852 performance for the month, plus Total 592 458 56.38 0.5063 1. 28, while not as good as that for July and August, is still well ahead of the normally-expected half-percent gain. There thus exists some justification for suspecting the Dow might wind up the year above the level of 1188.94, where it closed on November 30. An interesting question, given the fact that 1-,t!,h!is,–,,eyen1.ualitY.-'lastLfairlyighJteasonalprobabi1ityoftakingplace,-iswhe1heror-'lotitsocc'u'l'r- 1 rence, or lack thereof, would shed any light on what the market might do in 1985. The predictive value of the year-end rally, as we have pointed out, is based on its continu- ance into the new year. As the table below shows, the forecasting record for the month of December itself is not terribly exciting. All Years (87 Years) Dec-Jan Dec-Mar Dec-Jun Full Year Avg chg 0.88 1.12 2.12 6.61 Years Up 54 49 51 53 of YealBUp 62.1 56.3 58.6 60.9 Prev. Dec Up (62 Years) Avg chg 0.56 1. 08 3.36 7.93 Years Up 38 35 50 38 of Years Up 61. 3 56.5 64.5 61. 2 Prev. Dec Down (25 Years) Avg. chg 1.65 1.22 0.95 3.31 Years Up 16 14 11 15 of Years Up 64.0 56.0 44.0 60.0 The table covers the market performace for the initial one, three, six, and twelve months of each year since 1898. The first set of figures is for all years, and the last two sets cover years following an upward December and years following a downward December. By and large, the years after the previous December was a downward month show little difference from upward ones or from the average for all years. Interestingly enough, only slight statistical bias appears to be for the longer periods, six months and twelve months. The month of December being down has, with some reliability, suggested weakness over the first six months of the following year and has generally foreshadowed a smallerthan-average advance for the entire year. We have shown in previous studies that the only stock-market month which seems to have real predictive value is November, where, for some reason, the record at forecasting the following year's action is fairly good. November, 1984, of course, was a down month, thus producing some- what negative implications for 1985. It will be necessary to weigh these implications against the extent and durabihty of the year-end rally in producing a 1985 forecast. AWTrs ANTHONY W. TABELL DELAFIELD, HARVEY, TAB ELL INC. Dow-Jones Industrials (12 00 p. m.) 1176.13 S & P Composite (1200 p.m.) 162.00 Cumulative Index (12/13/84) 2030.29 No statement or expresSIOn of opinion or any otller maHer herem contained IS or Is to be deemed 10 be, directly or mdlreclly. an offer or the solicitation of an oller 10 buy or sell any security referred 10 or mentioned The matte IS presented merely for Ihe convenience of the subSCriber Whlfewe believe the sources cfour information 10 be reliable wem no way represent or guarantee the accuracy thereof nor of the statoments made herein Any action 10 be taken bylha SUbscriber should be based on hiS own Investigation and Inlorrn8110n Delaflold, Harvey, labell Inc, as a corporation .. nd I\S 01lICOI or employees, may now have, or may laler lal-e, pOSitions or trades In respect to any securities mentioned In this or any future Issue and such pOSItion may be dlfferenllrom any views now or heleafter epressed In thiS or any other Issue Delafield, Harvey Tabell fnc ,WhiCh IS registered wllh the SEC as an Investment advisor, may gleadvlce to lIs Investmenl advisory and other customers Independently of any statements made In thiS or In any other Issue FUrther Information on any security menlloneo herein IS available on request