Actually, I'm much more a long term investor than I am a trader. Certainly my long term holdings have been more profitable than my trades. I've owned MSFT in the past for long periods but this year more as a trader. Sometimes trading wasn't my original intent when I purchased it, it just wound up that way. <g>. Sometimes investors just change their mind quicker than they planned, turning them into at least temporary traders.
The pattern you describe in MSFT is seen in lots of tech stocks, but I don't believe that the past will always repeat itself. If it did, making money in the stockmarket would be easy. If things have changed for the better in the last 6 weeks, why is the relative strength down. Is Mr. Market wrong? Maybe. I have limited confidence in my ability to be really sure about the reasons behind most stock price moves, at least in time to make money on it. The fact that MSFT isn't down more than it is probably indicates that investors don't consdider the trial a major theat to the company.
I'm not trying to convince anyone, just expressing a opinion, my best guess, and trying to stir up some feedback. I'm unable to come to a clear decision about the prospects of MSFT the stock (which might be different from Microsoft the company), but I have a bullish bias. Most of the problems I see are long term, with the possibility of good news seeming more likely short term. I don't own any today, but will probably buy some on a pullback a bit closer to support around 73. Looking back (everything is clearer in retrospect) the best thing I could have done would have been to never sell any of the MSFT I ever bought.
Thanks for pointing out the Ragingbull article. I haven't followed the MSFT purchases as closely as I should have.
Concerning EMC, I wish I had more insight into it's decline. Maybe it 's just a liquid stock with big profits, so it's the easiest one for institutions to sell. The business model appears to be intact, so I'm going to hang on to my investment.
Thanks for the input. |
