re this whole "what should we be on the lookout for, gorillas or godzillas or kings" question:
I am increasingly leaning toward the view that Gemstar, as Merlin and others have pointed out, can wear all three hats. (Well, one of them's a crown, and from the Magilla cartoon as I recall one's a beanie, and I forget what Godzilla wears--a yarmulke?--but you know what I mean. Think Cerberus in a hat shop.)
So--if Gemstar does indeed have all three elements, and if it is still generally undiscovered by the street at large, wouldn't that make it the single most promising Y2K investment candidate in our stable? (Well, since it's Cerberus, maybe it's outside guarding the stable.<g>)
I was struck by how different our discussions of Gemstar are from the general ones in the press surrounding its Naz100 entry, indicating that--for example--its godzilla potential is still almost entirely unappreciated. If we're right, it could a very big year for Henry et al.
I intend therefore (if/when I can raise some more cash) to focus my next bets on GMST, with the aim of bringing it into closer proximity to Q in my portfolio (although still in second place). Anybody have any feelings on why this might be a bad idea?
bubbleboy/Ares@Q99,G2K.com
PS Happy Holidays to all :0)
PPS Bruce, you might have showed your guests that passage from Lynch about the Wal-Mart investors who got out at the beginning of the 80s, because they felt guilty about making so much money. Great insight from that passage that still sticks with me: "A stock doesn't care who owns it," and will make or lose money on its own future prospects regardless of whether you buy or sell. |
