TG,
You call it spinning and creative play, I call it actual analysis, of which your posts are generally devoid. A primary purpose of actual analysis is to figure out when the market sentiment is wrong.
We made a ton of money buying NT back in Novemeber 1998, at the time this was very much against the market sentiment. For the first 3-4 months it looked like a terrible decision, but thereafter it was a great call. We sold most of our holdings on the way up between $90 and $110. While we didn't top-tick at $143, I think it was a good call.
Judging a stock on emotional terms, as you do habitually, is not good business. All your talk of "the bigger they are, the harder they fall" is silly and unsupported by facts. I talk regularly with service providers around the world that are customers of both companies. I talk to salespeople in both companies. I go to nearly every important trade-show and management conference. I have one on one meetings with John Roth and Rich McGinn. The reason professional investors do this is to try to get an edge - an understanding that the conventional wisdom has missed.
If my memory serves me correctly, you run a CLEC in Italy. Perhaps you kibitz with vendor sales people. Maybe you used to work at NT or have alot of friends there who feed you stories. Whatever.
I am absolutely certain that I have more direct information about these companies than you do. I would think that you would want to read my points, engage in polite discussion, and draw your own conclusions. Instead you trade in invective, unequivical assertions, character assasination, and shameless boosterism.
Your post suggests simply: Since NT's stock went up more after its earnings announcement, it must be a better investment long term. I notice that whenever the Cisco-maniacs rub your face in the fact that Cisco is clearly more respected by the street than NT, you resort to the "just you wait" approach.
Gee, do you get the idea? |
