Cha2,
re: Emotionalism in Investing
<< Eric L: For a long time, long long in fact, you and I have exchanged info. ... Yet, for the last few months, I am puzzled ... Why do you continue to hold Qualcomm if the CEO is a hypster - or worse - ??? >>
I think it is time for you to chill ...
.., and I mean REALLY chill ...
... and start to be objective about investing in wireless.
I do not owe you an explanation of anything beyond what I've stated on this thread.
Your PM's over the last several months and the accusations contained therein are the most insulting, vitriolic, and antagonistic, I have ever received from any source on the internet and I have been online since 1985 using a UNIX shell account in the early days to conduct business research.
I hereby give you permission to share every insulting PM you have sent to me.
I also give you permission to share each and every one of my patient responses to your vitriol, provided that you do not edit them and put them in context that you delivered them.
I am going to ask you straight up a question that is occasionally asked in cyberspace.
What Is Your Agenda?
Recently you asked me ...
Sigh. ... Huh? ... good luck with your pitch for GSM onward.
If you do that again we will seriously go head to head.
I am going to repeat my previous response to you:
>> I don't post to this thread, on this subject, to "pitch" GSM.
I think that this might be an appropriate time to quote from a recently published book on investing in wireless written by engineer/author/Fool David Mock, and Tom Taulli:
The problem for investors is that quite often the assessment of standards adoption wanders away from objective reasoning and leans more towards taking sides in a soccer match.
Suddenly nationalistic pride takes over, and individuals begin to emotionally cheer for a company from their nation to succeed in a country that doesn't play by those rules. It's a game of focusing on the positives while trying to sweep the negative aspects under the rug.
While technical standards certainly are a driving force in wireless, the focus on adopted technology is quite often misplaced. Rather than understanding how an adopted technology helps it compete for market share, too many investors emotionally put money behind the technology they feel is technically superior. Their rational is that if the technology is superior everybody will flock to it, while shunning the other, inferior technologies.
Unfortunately, this is a very short-sighted approach to investing because it overlooks many other forces that drive the industry. There have been many cases of high-technology markets where supposedly inferior technologies absolutely pummeled the competition in the open market. ....
- "Tapping Into Wireless: The Savvy Investor's Guide to Profiting from the Wireless Wave" (2002) page 49 - <<
If what I have to say on the SI wireless threads is not palattable to you, please use the SI 'Ignore' function and stop losing sleep at night.
I am a diligent researcher of mobile wireless, of investing in same, and I remain technology agnostic, just as I was when we first discoursed.
I attempt to contribute to this thread in the most objective fashion possible.
- Eric - |
