LAST MILE TECHNOLOGIES - Let's Discuss Them Here Message Board

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Technology Stocks : LAST MILE TECHNOLOGIES - Let's Discuss Them Here

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next

To: j rector who wrote (244)	9/27/1996 11:17:00 AM
From:	of 12823

I don't know anything about John's contributions; Leo posted misinformation it seemed and I don't follow him either, yet he has turned out to be correct in result considering that "constructive contributors" all said Aware was a losing investment and a bad company. I passed on the IPO and the re-tracement based on these so-called "constructive contributors"; they haven't been very constructive to helping me make profits! I am in on the Orckit IPO today, yet Aware in hindsight was a killer IPO opportunity giving two separate entries. Chris championed NUKO when it was under $12 repeatedly; I think that was a contribution. I currently champion NUKO and Ortel although these are both too late to get in on now. Recommendations have to be taken when the price point is correct; at the time of the recommendation, and you have to sell it when recommended to sell. Data, facts, information, technological knowledge; none of that means anything if you don't buy at the right price and sell at the right price. I don't personally like to judge anyone posting. If I disagree, I post the disagreement, but everyone has equal worth to post their opinion. Who is to know what is constructive? Anything can happen. Good companies like GEMS can drop 40% overnight. Who really knows for sure, so who can judge anothers quality of contribution. I don't like this thinking. I don't want to comment on it again either. The point has been made repeatedly. The fact that opinions of experts have not been reflected in the actual outcome of events makes me suspect the experts; your "contributors". That was what the point of the WSJ article was BTW. How can you argue against the record. If you have someone say a company is a bad investment and then it shoots up anyway, why would anyone put value on the person who said it was a bad investment; it seems so clear!

Report TOU Violation

Share This Post

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next