Mostly agree with you. Stocks that do well regardless of earnings show theoretical, perceived (or pyramid scheme) tremendous potential. That's the internuts or wireless&comm (QCOM, RIMM, vox). Most internuts are plateauing. The comms that do well are profitable [IE earnings are > 0 :) ].
This does not apply in SIII's case, because KenP was extremely eloquent in his claim (CNBC etc) of increased market share gains, this moved the stock from the $2 range to its present $10+ position. Some people (like me) started trading in this stock based on (mostly umc) valuation AND Ken's persuasive arguments. It's been about 9 months, and the 50% market share thing has not happened.
I don't think $15-$20 is possible until the numbers back KenP's persuasive rhetoric, but if siii was broken up, then I think $15 is definitely achievable.
Still, I did ok with siii the first time (actually 3rd, the first two times 96-97, got burned averaging down, stayed away). Lost a little the 2nd time. This time, I'm up about 10% on an insignificant investment. I never had enough in this stock to be worried, but being able to sell siii to via for 13.5 would have been fun.
Is it fun trading in siii? (I guess so).
Is this one of my long term core holdings? (No).
Earnings are the last thing the street cares about... |
