Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

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.

Technology Stocks : Dell Technologies Inc. -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Mohan Marette who wrote (132654)	6/14/1999 4:05:00 PM
From: Sig	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 176387

Mohan: The last few weeks cleared out a lot of margin positions. The last two days are clearing out the stop losses on the internuts. I would expect the wind to change very soon unless its a generalized tech bailout. But I find it very hard to believe that market makers will leave the techs altogether. Too much potential and actual growth there. Several stocks approaching Greg buying range(G) Sig (watching for dead cats)

To: Mohan Marette who wrote (132654)	6/14/1999 11:18:00 PM
From: stockman_scott	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 176387

~OT~ Mohan: Some CramerSpeak on the Net Wreck...FYI... <<Wrong! Rear Echelon Revelations: Cold, Bloodless and All-Powerful By James J. Cramer 6/14/99 Neither Stephen King nor Thomas Harris has ever seen something as horrible as a forced sell of a Net stock. In fact, I have this vision of King and Harris getting color for the villains of their next novels by hanging over the shoulders of these clerks as they issued margin call after margin call to brokers this afternoon. Cold, bloodless and all-powerful. Yes, the losses on the TheStreet.com Internet Sector index only gained steam as brokers cashiered their clients' stocks to raise cash to meet the calls. The selling goes unabated until the calls are met, and the clients themselves are helpless to stop them. Making things worse of course, was the news that eToys (ETYS:Nasdaq) had less visibility in its business than when it did its deal. This was not the day to announce that things aren't what they seemed a few short weeks ago. In the meantime, the cyclicals, heavily underowned by individuals, mocked the losses of those riding the Internet crash -- and down 50% does seem like a bit of a crash to me -- by moving up all day. The DOT closes a point off its low, the Morgan Stanley Cyclical Index closes a point off its high. Soon we will regard the cyclicals as safe because they WON'T BE SOLD BY HANNIBAL THE MARGIN CLERK! Imagine that. Random musings: If you can handle it, I will be doing a Yahoo! chat at 5 p.m. EDT. *** James J. Cramer is manager of a hedge fund and co-founder of TheStreet.com. At time of publication, his fund was long Yahoo!. His fund often buys and sells securities that are the subject of his columns, both before and after the columns are published, and the positions that his fund takes may change at any time. Under no circumstances does the information in this column represent a recommendation to buy or sell stocks. Cramer's writings provide insights into the dynamics of money management and are not a solicitation for transactions. While he cannot provide investment advice or recommendations, he invites you to comment on his column at jjcletters@thestreet.com. >> **I think this post was pulled from Cramer's Online Chat this afternoon.... .<<Creme_Delacramer: Today was pure torture in Net land. I don't think it will end until a bunch of things happen though. I put up a six point checklist on TheStreet.com about what we need to see and point number one is: The deals must be cancelled. No more dot.coms for awhile. We are choking on dot.coms! >>

To: Mohan Marette who wrote (132654)	6/15/1999 6:25:00 AM
From: stockman_scott	Respond to of 176387

June 15, 1999 Hey Mohan: "High-Tech Makes the Difference"...You wouldn't know that by looking at the nasdaq though <GG>. Check this article out... <<Filed at 12:13 a.m. EDT 6/15/99 By The Associated Press NEW YORK (AP) -- Few seers and probably most Americans failed to foresee the productivity surge that has lifted the U.S. economy into its current high orbit. To the contrary, pessimism was widespread in the late 1980s and even into the 1990s, and it wasn't uncommon for professors to speak of the economy in the past tense, as if its best days were over. ''An economy that 20 years ago seemed to have seen its better days is displaying a remarkable run of economic growth,'' Greenspan, chairman of the Federal Reserve, told Congress this week. But you needn't go back 20 years, nor even 10, to uncover the deep concern about Japanese and German competition, and even that from small Asian nations. America was slipping, it was said. There was plenty to worry about: budget and trade imbalances, unemployment, business failures, a rising percentage of people earning below the poverty level, health care problems ... Americans lacked confidence. They were pessimistic, so much so that Greenspan expressed it to Congress in 1992 as ''a sense that there's something foreboding out in the longer term.'' He described it as ''to a large extent a concern about whether or not their children and grandchildren will have standards of living comparable to their own.'' Shortly thereafter, that generation began its ascent into the outer space of material living standards. The ratio of families owning homes reached a record high, unemployment a record low. The economy's improvement, Greenspan said this week, ''appears to have its roots in ongoing advances in technology'' that reduced production costs, the one sure way to raise standards. Lower-cost production meant lower prices and more sales. And more sales meant more jobs and more earners. And while earners spent rather than saved, those lower costs kept inflation at bay. What spurred business to invest in high-tech equipment such as computers and fiber-optic cable, and to innovate in management and marketing? Competition. The threat from Europe and Asia, for example. To innovate was the only way the United States, a high-wage nation, could compete in the new global economy. And that's what it did. And as the economy underwent this fundamental change, a new factor, opportunity, evolved. Accomplishments created more opportunities and became the base for new technological visions. While seemingly awed by productivity's accomplishment, which wasn't widely understood as recently as two years ago even by those with economic microscopes, Greenspan is again worrying. ''The growth of productivity cannot increase indefinitely,'' he told Congress. Earlier he had made clear his view that inflation remained a threat and that higher borrowing rates might be needed. There are indeed signs of overexuberance, in the stock market and in the easy acceptance of the notion that continued gains in productivity will be the economy's vaccine against inflation. With unemployment at its lowest in decades, and the hot economy demanding even more workers, cost-reducing technology may not be sufficient to offset the use of marginally productive workers. It is Greenspan's job to worry, especially when events and opinions become so exuberant that nobody else seems concerned. And it has become his policy to publicly air his views before acting. Maybe he won't raise interest rates, and some stock analysts are even betting that he will let his warnings alone cool the economy. But even if rates do rise, productivity also may continue to rise. Few people really know the course the economy will take in the immediate future. Not even Alan Greenspan. And surely not those who were showered with benefits after believing the future was bleak. >>