You are right, I do not follow too much of the dialogue re the Fool, just how their portfolios are justified. Matter of fact, only recently have I started following their stuff again as they are NOW starting to comment on QCOM, and I found that curious. I have watched them justify stock purchases, such as Ebay, and then days later see that Ebay signs an agreement with AOL.....and I think the obvious answer here is there was inside knowledge of the upcoming deal, especially in light of the cocky comments made by some of their staff. I kind of started looking past their verbal justifications for their actions, and watched instead volumes and prices just days in advance of their announcements, and concluded that their rhetoric for talking stocks getting ready to be purchased into their ports was more advertising than solidly founded DD. The appearance of solid DD is terrific, and it is, IMO, advertising in the guise of DD. Thus, I quit following TMF last Spring, after some lukewarm so-what editorials re QCOM. Anyway, those are the facts I discerned, and no longer am I listening to TMF without wondering what is up their sleeve. I certainly appreciate the educational bent given to their operation, however I question the authenticity of some of their implied objectivity. After all, what better way to hype a stock than to keep it right up front as a discussion of pros and cons? Not saying this is good nor bad, just that one needs to look past the superficial appearance of The Dueling Fools.
Just my opinion. Martin Thomas |
