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: LindyBill who wrote (7286)	10/1/1999 3:26:00 PM
From: tekboy	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 54805

<<I am not sure if I made my own experience in Q clear. I bought on the IPO, sold out two years later, invested elsewhere, and got back into Q in April of '99. In my case, my calculations showed that I did twice as well this way as if I had stayed in Q all of the time. Of course, I did damn well when I was out of it, and invested the proceeds.>> This is what I meant by timing the gorilla, Lindy: you got out when you thought the stock wouldn't move, then jumped back in quickly after the Ericsson deal demonstrated primate status. UnGle FranQ waited a bit longer, until he felt more certain, then also went in. You all were mocked by the long -time Q holders for your tardy entry, to which mockery you replied cuttingly (as above) that you made more while out than you would have while in. It is important to separate the two debates going on right now. The first is over whether it makes sense to try and time gorillas and gorilla-candidates, and if so, when the best time to get in is (mid-chasm; early bowling alley; late bowling alley; early tornado; late tornado; main street). The second debate is over where particular companies and their technologies are in the whole cycle. I agree with UF that right now GMST looks more solid than RMBS does, even than RMBS did a couple of weeks ago. That's why I got out of RMBS at 90 and into GMST at 67. BUT--I agree with Apollo that those getting into GMST now are doing so significantly earlier than the FM suggests, and thus should be aware that an unpleasant surprise of one sort or another might still occur. What made RMBS a dicey investment three weeks ago was not that this recent glitch WOULD occur, but that until the sun had set calmly on "Rambus Christmas" it MIGHT occur. GMST is not a lock yet, which is why the GMSTers expect (and deserve!) a risk premium. I would submit that, if all goes well, we may look back on the last months of 99 for GMST as we did the first months for QCOM. Earnings over the next couple of quarters should do very well, and help confirm its DNA--in which case we will be able to profit not just from the April onwards Q run, but the February-March run as well. Optimistically, tekboy PS UF posted the previous message while I was writing this one; it makes a similar point and is acceptable as a rescindment of GMST-hubris. <g>