America is full of people who can offer insights to the next "ten-bagger". I'm not into that. And we'll look at the final scoreboard after five years. Not a day before that
I recall that last fall the question of which to invest, Qualcomm or Nokia, would be revisited in a year. I was under the impression that by now we would know whether Irwin Jacobs and his Q gang were snakeoil salesman or brilliant visionaries. I remember your opinion.
Now we have to wait five years to determine? Tero, please tell me it isn't so!
The fact is, you continue to ignore the superior investment opportunity of QCOM because you fail to understand their business model.
As far as what is the most "lucrative" stock... I don't care. Safety and long-term profit picture are more important.
Safety? I assume you stand by your statements that QCOM was risky last year? That's funny! The writing was already on the wall, you just couldn't read it. And how can you not care about which stock appreciates the most?
The paths of glory lead but tho the grave, Bux. I know that what many people are now after is "ten-baggers", to use the American idiom (and when a popular expresssion describing shares that are expected to rise by 1'000% enters the language, you know that trouble will follow).
Nokia is a ten-bagger, it took about 3 years and now carries a market value of $147 Billion, three times that of Qualcomm. Does that mean trouble will follow? Since you don't understand the business of Q, you think Nokia is the better investment. You also think Nokia is a safer investment. I will take you up on this and I don't think we will have to wait 5 years before the answer is evident to all. I know $294/share must sound scary to people of your ilk, but Qualcomm has only 160 million shares outstanding compared to well over 1 billion shares for Nokia. If Qualcomm had the same number of shares, Q shares would be valued at less than $26 each at current prices.
High-risk picks were Voicestream and Omnipoint. The details and timing for these picks are you-know-where. How many people took a risk on VSTR and OMPT last January, bux?
You are right. I didn't buy either of those. Those were (and are) high-risk picks. Much higher than Q. Why would you recommend that investors carry more risk than Q for less reward? It is just one more example of your inability (or refusal) to understand the business of Qualcomm.
I think you are letting your personal bias interfere with your investing advice. I do not choose QCOM over Nok because I am an American and Q is an American Co. but because Q has a superior business model. You appear to bad-mouth Q because their eventual dominance threatens your "hometown" favorites.
Bux
|
