The claim that Gilder doesn't recommend stocks is ludicrous. His promo literature hypes, or at least used to hype, how much money you'd have made if you'd bought Qualcomm or JDSU when he first put them into his hypothetical portfolio which was on the outside back page of his monthly 8 page newsletter, and invites you to subscribe because there's more where that came from. He wasn't like that when I first got a subscription, in 1998, but that was before Qualcomm prices went to the moon.
If you haven't followed the saga of what happened to Gilder's picks, maybe you believe him when he says he doesn't pick stocks. I don't know why he says that, but it's untrue, and I don't like liars, especially people who tell lies to line their own pocketbook. I think if he wanted to sue me for libel, any jury in the country would interpret his promotional materal the same way. He doesn't say "buy this stock," he says, "if you had bought the stocks I picked for my model portfolio when I picked them, you'd be rich." If there's a difference it's lost on me.
In fairness to Gilder, he's identified some very good companies, and he does have a lot of insight into emerging technologies. But I just can't stomach the hypocracy anymore. Also, the "Wings of Light" poetic BS really rubs me the wrong way. We're talking about things made out of steel, plastic, copper, fiberglass, there's no wings anywhere, George.
Here's one of the stocks he put in his model portfolio (I showed it to my younger son and he said "Fluuuuusssshhh . . . . . "
siliconinvestor.com |
