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: tekboy who wrote (7370)	10/3/1999 5:26:00 AM
From: Bruce Brown	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 54805

I think it would be a fascinating and instructive exercise to compare the long-term charts of the main gorillas and gorilla-candidates, and see just what patterns exist in them and how those patterns relate to different events (earnings, suit settlements, analyst reports, etc.). This would be a great help in developing well-grounded rules for perceptual GGers. I have neither the time nor the expertise to do such analysis myself now, but maybe eventually...or maybe others... Excellent suggestion. This is something I do on a regular basis - chart reading that is. Some find it boring and insignificant, but in terms of seeing patterns as to how certain stocks behave to certain issues is indeed a learning excercise worthy of supporting the excellent theory of LTB&H. I haven't too much study in regards to the Gorillas as it pertains to pinning down certain events such as tekboy mentions. I've taken the obvious look at QCOM. I've also, as an excercise, compared the charts of Microsoft to Apple to see the obvious. Intel and AMD offer an interesting comparison as well. I've spent more time studying how they behave in market corrections, economic situations, various interest rate environments and product transitions. Word of caution to the wise - don't lay any other stock's chart you own on top of Dell or AOL for comparing sake for fear of slumping into a depressive funk. That is, unless of course, you were lucky enough to buy shares of either several years ago. ;-) I think that the prevailing thing that one comes up with in reading some charts and seeing how various events form patterns as the events relate to analyst's reports, earnings, suits, settlements over the long term is this - most of it turns out to be a small blip. The shorter term chart of QCOM and the March 25th settlement is an obvious severity in the chart movement now. However, as time goes on and the chart lengthens to five, ten, fifteen and twenty year lengths beyond this year alone - the steep move will not seem so steep, but will indeed still signal the obvious event considering it's hard to conceal a 4000 percent move since QCOM traded in 1992. I'm under the impression that with MSFT, INTC and CSCO - we don't have any similar one time event to compare it to in the past other than the crash of 1987. Microsoft's chart reveals a similar move up pre-1988 to Qualcomm's recent move. I guess we could all only hope for a ten year follow up to Qualcomm's chart such as the MSFT chart reveals. A little downward blip in 1987 and the bear market of 90/91 are the only two significant marks on the MSFT chart. Comparing Apple's chart to Microsoft - one sees nothing but a rocket from November/December of 1985 to the crash of 1987 for Apple. I think we all know the story of January 1988 to current date. Nevertheless, it is fun to compare the charts as it pertains to the Gorilla Game. If you lay a five year Intel chart compared to Qualcomm chart from 1995 to 2000 you see that give or take a little bit of return - they both gave you an average of what appears to be 1000 percent for the time period. Q is over 1000 and INTC, with the recent retracement is slightly under 1000 percent. MSFT is over 1000 percent for that period. CSCO is over 2000 percent. Gemstar is at 1000 percent. A two year chart puts RNWK at over 1000 percent and Rambus at - well let's just say it's a flatliner at the moment. If that's Gorilla Game investing....based on a mere 5 year example where we get returns like the above with the confirmed gorillas and even if we jumped into Q, RNWK, GMST and RMBS maybe before group think had smelled the sweet gorilla like odor - I think the GG is worth the study. Throw in a couple of those risky investments like a Godzilla AOL for a 5 year 10,000 percent return and a 'too be held lightly Prince with attitude' like Dell for a 6,000 percent gain - and the GG&K (Prince&Godzilla) = $$$$$$$ Enough $$$$ to overcome the Rambus mistake of being a little too early. Keep in mind, I'm only talking about returns since 1995. Going back before that with the big three - INTC, CSCO and MSFT is obvious. Sorry if nothing I said above makes any kind of a point, I'm recovering from a late night meal with too much Austrian wine and too much Austrian political conversation. Wow! BB

To: tekboy who wrote (7370)	10/3/1999 12:53:00 PM
From: Sam Johnson	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 54805

First time poster: First off, a confession and some thank you's: My brother directed me to the FM and this thread this spring, and prior to that, I had been creatively throwing money away in various penny stocks. (Confessing your transgressions is good for the soul - could one of the Knights of the thread absolve of me of that sin?) After finding the manual, this thread, and the error of my ways, I'm happily in the Q and looking at Gemstar at the moment. This is the first SI thread I read each day, and many thanks to all the contributors (Lindy, your investing-history post was very inspiring, and I've sent it to several friends.) I've always found investor psychology fascinating (especially my own) and have enjoyed the 'Perceptual chasm-crossing' thread. Please forgive me rambling on about it, but I wanted to throw this out to the thread and see if it's relevant. I've been thinking all weekend about investor sentiment as it relates to GG matters, and I'm curious if anyone has read any of George Soros' writings about 'investor bias'. Someone mentioned 'fundamentals' vs investor psychology' (sorry for the paraphrasing), and Soros has made a point that I think is relevant to the discussion. He believes that investor bias (his term)actually IS a fundamental, (and an almost-always overlooked one) given certain circumstances and market conditions, especially in fast-moving markets. I've been trying to fit that with GG theory, and please excuse my newbie attempt to do so. It seems that investor bias would matter the least to an established gorilla on Main Street, and the most to a candidate such as Gemstar or Rambus. A couple of possible scenarios are: the product-adoption chasm has been crossed, but not the perceptual chasm, and the Gorilla candidate or product is lacking a final fundamental, investor bias, to have the stock reflect the new Gorilla status. This seems to me to be the sweetest possible circumstance for a gorilla hunter, since the candidate is one Defining Event or perceptual shift away from a Qualcomm-like burst - and Gemstar seems to fit that scenario. Another scenario is that investor bias has gotten ahead of the other fundamentals, and (Soros claims that bias can be a fickle thing early on) any bad news can cause it to reverse and take a long time to recover. I don't know if Rambus is flirting with this or not. In the long run, this probably doesn't matter, but it strikes me as most relevant for the initial entry into a potential primate. If Rambus is truly gorilla material, market perception will eventually get on board, but spotting a Gemstar that may not have yet had it's coming-out party/defining event seems like a lot of fun. <g> I hope you'll forgive me for mixing too many metaphors here. Trying to incorporate Soros, or anyone else's ideas, into GG theory may not prove to be useful, but...I did it anyway. <g> Thanks again for a great group. Sam