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.

Strategies & Market Trends : Gorilla and King Portfolio Candidates -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Mike Buckley who wrote (7060)	9/26/1999 2:31:00 AM
From: tekboy	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 54805

<<while I share [UF's] view that it's easy for the thread to drift from the low risk/high reward scneario, I'm not as convinced as some are that this gorilla-game stuff is as risk-free as I think some are beginning to think it might be. I think it's just as easy for the thread to drift into what some people think is a no risk/high return scenario as it is for people to drift into thinking the Citrixs and Rambuses of the world are less risky than [UF] and I might believe.>> --MB Well put. GG strikes me as an intellectually sound framework for helping to evaluate the relative strength and prospects of different companies, not a simple way to achieve incredible results without risk. Actually, I think this thread (supplemented by good company threads) is better than the manual, precisely because the multiple independent minds it draws upon challenge each other, creating an excellent testing ground for information and argumentation. What makes QCOM so compelling is not a word from on high, nor its recent leap forward, nor even all the cheerleading it receives here and elsewhere. What is compelling is the strength of the arguments put forward in its favor, together with the evidence summoned to back those arguments up. That's why people were so unflustered when the GG's very author disagreed about its primate status. The same is true, I am becoming convinced, with GMST. It's not just BECAUSE Mike and Stew have been touting it, it's WHY they have been doing so, and how they have been able to come up with very good answers to any and all skeptical questions put to them so far. That, combined with the well-justified visions of the future marketplace outlined in the 6/23/99 Stephens report, spell a very promising opportunity. The discussions about Rambus, on the other hand, have a kind of passion about them that (combined with the awesomely complex technical stuff) makes it very difficult for an amateur to tread confidently. I imagine it must have been like this with QCOM back in the "holy war" days before the Ericsson deal. Mike points out that putting all one's eggs in one basket is very risky, and not recommended for all. So, I would say, is trusting entirely to one's own independent DD. I mean, if you're Mike Buckley and you're out of synch with a lot of other very knowledgeable folks, it's probably the world that's wrong. But if you're lowly tekboy, it's probably the other way round... : ) tb