Ask Mohan about the Market Message Board

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Pastimes : Ask Mohan about the Market

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next

To: Joseph G. who wrote (9640)	11/28/1997 2:15:00 AM
From: Bilow	Read Replies (3) of 18056

Well S.Korea gapped down again, and dug its hole about 5% deeper: Last Trade 1:44AM ú 411.91 Change -21.19 (-4.89%) Prev Close 433.10 Day's Range 407.22 - 430.25 Open 430.25 52-week Range 423.69 - 799.54 Get the latest: quote.yahoo.com^KS11&d=t You know, even if SEA wasn't continuing to have problems, that is no reason why our market should remain so over-valued. It seems to me that price to book and price to sales are much better measures of market valuation than price to earning. Unless there were some sort of permanent reason why the economy has changed in such a way that earnings as a percentage of sales is due to continue climbing for the foreseeable future. It just seems to me that with P/B way over unity, it makes sense for companies to sell stocks and increase their business until this is corrected. Stocks are so easy to produce, why don't businesses take even more advantage of investors while they still can? p.s., I think that the current tecnological revolution is the same one that has been going on for about 400 years. It started slow, but doesn't appear to me to have accelerated much since 1965. Sure new stuff gets produced, but I'm not so sure that a significantly larger percentage of our population is spending their time developing new technologies than in 1965. By that, I mean that the percentage of population employed as scientists or engineers is now within a factor of 10 of what it was in 65, thus the development rate has stabilized. The exponential growth that distinguishes so radically the scientific advances of the 18th century from those of the mid 20th century is gone. Most of the reason for this is that while once the percentage of the population that worked with ideas was limited by the hard work everybody had to do in order to eat, it is now instead limited by the availability of suitably inclined and capable people. What happens to that development rate when they start making computers smart enough to do independent research and development? Could go back up. As of now, computers have already replaced a lot of white collar jobs. (And created new ones.) -- Carl

Report TOU Violation

Share This Post

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next