Follow-up post #1
(PM sent to Michael Murphy 04 Jan, 2003)
===============
Compare these two portfolios:
Rick 'Mr. Biotech' Harmon:
siliconinvestor.com
Scott Jiminez:
siliconinvestor.com
[ 1/9/03 NOTE: THE OFFENDING 300K SHARES OF UNVC HAVE BEEN REMOVED, AS REQUESTED, AND REPLACED BY CASH]
My portfolio has one outlier. 6 of the remaining 7 are priced over $10, 4 over $20, 3 over $30, 2 over $40. A highly reasonable commonsensical, selection.
Richard Harmon's portfolio has only ONE stock over $10 and 50% are under $5 (the common cut off point for the definition of 'penny stocks'!).
So, except for an extreme outlier, I present a highly balanced, lower risk, common sense portfolio and get lectures out the wazoo and kicked off the thread while MR. BIOTECH (!) gets the warm and fuzzies for submitting one of the most risky and absolutely non-commonsensical portfolios of the entire bunch.
In fact, I would wager that the average share price of the stocks in my portfolio is one of the highest of ALL those submitted (share price commonly recognized as one of the most reliable measure for risk level of an equity)!
Did you even LOOK at the rest of my portfolio???
Did you simply buy into all the garbage flying around on the thread void of committing a single moment to legwork? While it could easily be argued I erred with UNVC, how can a portfolio with 50% penny stocks, and 85% stocks below $10, be classified as anything BUT void of common sense?
I get a lecture and tossed on my ass for 1 mistake and Harmon presents a pathetically risky portfolio and you except his ranting with solemnity.
Polemical nonsense, Michael?
=============== |
