SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Technology Stocks : Advanced Micro Devices - Moderated (AMD)
AMD 213.43+6.2%Dec 19 9:30 AM EST

 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  
To: hmaly who wrote (16986)11/1/2000 2:53:16 AM
From: jamok99Read Replies (1) of 275872
 
hmly,

<<As far as I know, I didn't stone anyone. I just pointed out the obvious. If Doug truly believes in what he is saying, he should have sold his AMD stock whenever he believed Jerry was lying to him. Any investor should do that with any stock he buys...

I told him to stuff it because he is violating one of the principle rules of investing, which is to sell any and all stocks in which you are uncomfortable with.>>

Let me address the underlying principle you seem to be suggesting - that if one has significant reservations about an aspect of a company or its operations, one should immediately sell (or never buy) such a stock. I don't believe investing is this unambiguous - there are always questions (i.e., risk) associated with every stock. For instance, the fact that AMD had continuing infrastructure problems, and appeared less than forthcoming about this - does this mean we all should've dumped the stock as soon as those became apparent? Are you also suggesting that complex factors such as one's buy-in price, timing of selling, future prospects for a company, etc. shouldn't be considerations in a decision to sell? Suppose a company has great products, but questionable management, and the quality of management wasn't clear at the time of purchase? If one really used the underlying criteria you seem to be suggesting - that in order to invest one has to have no serious doubts about an aspect of a company's operations, then one would have a portfolio that consisted of zero equity candidates, and nothing but treasury bonds, assuming one had no questions about the government.

Also, I wrote:
<<I think some of what you've said in recent posts borders on abusive. <<<

You responded,

<<Abusive????? Asking a guy to provide a link is done here all the time. Telling a guy to sell his stock if he doesn't believe in the company is abusive? Personally, I think it is good advice>>

I think it was obvious that this *isn't* what I was referring to. To refresh your memory, you stated,

<< What happens if Jerry does win the jihad. How much will your 50 shares of AMD be worth then? And if you think Jerry can't win, then sell. Who gives a sh*t?>>

Seems to me to be about two notches above "F**k you - get lost". Again, I would reiterate the point that 'stoning the messenger' simply detracts from the value of the thread by dismissing points of view you happen to disagree with, but which may be of valuable consideration.
Report TOU ViolationShare This Post
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext