Ryan,
Y2k is a really interesting issue for me. I remember during the old days of SI thinking how insane these investors were believing and investing in such a stupid and simple concept. I am no fool, and I refused to buy a co operating on a concept and a 275 p/e.
Then my Co., VERY low tech, issued its internal study indicating how much $$$ it would cost to to address this issue. Then the meetings on addressing this issue started. A couple months later I was in a computer store and noticed a magazine called the Year 2000 journal. Then came the y2k index, and about eight months ago, I was reading a legal article on how companies should make plans to retain (read: lock in) their programmers when the y2k salary wars heat up. I finally admitted that I was wrong. I think many CEOs, fund managers, investment bankers, and investment magazine reporters and others have and will make the same epiphany.
I am NOT a y2k specialist. I cannot sit here and argue the attributes of different toolsets. Yet I want to particiapate substantially in this sector. Although some small outfits may grow faster, SYNT and IMRS are both quality companies which will be around when the dust settles. Like the DELL/MSFT/INTC tech paradigm, I bleive once the institutions come, they will situate at the mid-size quality companies, so I stay away from the smaller ones. I have to admit that I got a quick speculative double in TPRO (got in first), yet I monitored it every hour from work and got out as soon as I could. I like companies which interact DAILY with fortune 100s and 500s. For that, you can't beat IMRS or SYNT.
I monitor the IMRS thead as there are numerous, not all, indiviuals there who really monitor IMRS as a company and the sector as a whole.
Lets see if the end of the year provides the same rise as last year.
IMHO
Stephen |
