Paul - What happened to Carl Johnson? He was certainly
willing to spell out why intel was going to be a poor
bet when it was selling in the 70s. He was not shy about
explaining ON THIS THREAD that WE didn't really understand
the economics of the semi industry. Perhaps he was right
and just got mangled by foolish investors who simply
listened to Intel explain how sales were better than
expected and margins were improving. Carl still posts on
other threads, but for some reason he has abandoned
giving us the benefit of his insights here.
On the subject, what ever happened to Elaine Garzarelli.
She was sure the market would tank and her pronouncements
helped make for a couple of bad days-weeks. Either she
was dead wrong or "her indicators" are not accurate
predictors of the future" or she was simply premature and
her predictions will come true a bit later.
From Joe Granville to Elaine Garzarelli to Carl Johnson to
the old Andy Chen (whom I believe has become at Intel bull
of late), the number of people who assert that they
know to a certainty the near term future path of the market
and particular stocks is large. The correlation between their
pronouncements and the results is not terribly compelling.
Oh, I left out Kurlak who, if I remember correctly, put out a
sell on Intel in the 50s and then a buy in the 80s. At least
he had the sense to adjust to reality.
Why doesn't someone start compiling an authenticated batting
average for these guys? I can know the batting average of
virtually every mutual fund (and therefore the stock picking
and stock timing effectiveness of their methods). As they
say, past performance is no guarantee of future performance,
but the odds are better when Babe Ruth is at bat, rather than
say, Daryl Strawberry.
Two people I knew who happened to be school teachers both quit
to become stock brokers. One explained to me and others how
he knew what the market and individual stocks were going to
do. I believed him (1970 - I was 31) and he managed to
lose about 50% of my money in about 2 years (at the end he
had me in wheat futures!). The other one became a broker about
the time I wanted to buy Intel originally (in 1982). She
has become an Intel fan over time, keeps me posted with
virtually everything in print that concerns intel and
has made various other recommendations over the years that
have had a pretty good track record. She doesn't claim to
know the immediate direction of the Dow or individual stocks
but listens to my thoughts and then tells me what the
current consensus opinion is and what her opinion is.
I get scared nowadays by people who claim that they know to
a certainty what the future holds. They might, but once
they establish a poor batting average, I (and I hope many
others) lose interest in their pronouncements.
What Elaine Garzarelli should have said is that the market
had had a great run, is relatively high in valuation and
that all market runs come to an end, sometimes a violent
overeaction that can provide a great opportunity. but no
one really knows when that will occur so one had to be a
little more cautious in a richly valued market than in an
undervalued market. The bottom line for me is that I'm
less and less fond of market timers and more and more
interested in locating solid companies with bright prospects
whose future has been overlooked or undervalued by the
market. I can't tell you how many of my friends have bought
Intel, had a nice short term run, and then sold, never
rebuying the stock. Everyone wants to sting the market for
a few points and feel smart.
Good investing to all.
Burt |
