Paul,
There are a lot of days when I don't understand my own strategy, which makes it twice as hard to explain to someone else what I'm doing at any given point in time. I do try to identify value from a more or less traditional fundamental perspective, but once I think I've found one, a lot of TA gets thrown into the mix. I suppose what it comes down to is I can't see any reason to let market makers and day traders keep my profits when they're on the table.
Interland is probably as good an example as any since it's been one of my pets since September 2001. If I had "invested" in it at my first entry price of $1.17, I'd be sitting here 16 months later at break even, after letting a ton of trading profits get away. Doing fundamental research from a value perspective I think gives me a better feel of what the market should be paying at any given time. Most of my INLD trades were based on the assumption that fair value was about $2.50 and anything much below that point was a buy and anything much over that point was a sell. I don't know if it makes sense or not, but it's a company I sort of view as being part of my portfolio even when I don't own it. It's also a situation where I consider the company to be a lot less speculative than it was a year ago, and buy and hold may end up being the better way to play it. I suppose my reasoning is if a company is a good longer term value, it should also be a good shorter term trade. Plus, since the topic is value investing, I figure I should at least touch on the subject every once in awhile.<g> |
