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 : Qualcomm Incorporated (QCOM) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: JMD who wrote (35476)	7/17/1999 12:38:00 PM
From: gdichaz	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 152472

Surfer: Yes. The early bird does gather some worms. But it is also possible for the early bird to eat well. G/LOR are major downside examples to being "too soon," as actual events have beat us up very hard. Just a few "exogenous" factors (choke) such as politics and falling satellites, etc. hit. So in retrospect was buying G/LOR when we did a foolish act? For the last month being in already has been good. For the next few years, what? Suggest being in is still good. But then I believe Peter Lynch was correct that a solid investment base permits a few flyers which may do very well or may bomb. And the gain from the winners can far outweigh losses from the losers if sell when fundamentals change. Did the fundamentals change on G*/LOR? I suggest they did not. Just the view of an old man with patience. Onward and upward. Chaz

To: JMD who wrote (35476)	7/17/1999 1:19:00 PM
From: LindyBill	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 152472

Loral and Globalstar JMD, what we are saying is stay out of Loral and Globalstar until it is proven,and use the money you have in them, to get rich in something that is moving now, like Q!

To: JMD who wrote (35476)	7/17/1999 2:44:00 PM
From: Mike Buckley	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 152472

Mike (JMD), You mentioned that the timing of my investment based on gorilla-game thinking might yield a higher net present value than for those who invested much earlier. I haven't seen any studies putting it in that context. The Gorilla Game authors discuss net present value relative to the competitive advantage period, but they don't make any quantitative assessments and they don't make any historical comparisons that I remember. It would be interesting, as an example, to determine the annualized rates of return of investments in Intel, Cisco, Microsoft and SAP. We could compare those values using two purchase dates -- one that is several years before gorilla-game criteria would dictate buying the stocks and the other being when gorilla-game thinking says it's best to buy. To make sure I haven't accidentally mislead anyone, the gorilla-game thinking about the timing of an initial investment has to do with risk/reward scenarios, not necessarily increasing the net present value of an investment. --Mike Buckley