I think it's a major, and dangerous, fallacy propogated by Motley Fool, Peter Lynch, and others, that if the business is doing well, the stock must be a good investment.
So when you execute as you have stated you will. You buy back in at, say, $40 (sold at $20). You maybe then will avoid spending some time looking at a piece of paper stating $10 and thinking about loosing money temporarily. And you will have bought back 1/2 the number of shares that you owned at $20. So when this stock goes back up 1,200%. It will be as if you only went up 300% because you have only half the number of shares you sold at double the price. Then you can go around saying that you lost so much money in the bear winter of 200/2001. But if you didn't sell, you wouldn't have this permanent loss to deal with. It would be as if you dodged the bullet. MF, Peter Lynch, and others still sound so stupid?
BirdDog |
