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 : Amazon.com, Inc. (AMZN) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: GST who wrote (79473)	10/3/1999 8:41:00 PM
From: KeepItSimple	Respond to of 164684

They are simply in denial. Earlier profits have blinded their common sense. Perhaps permanently removed it. Like I said, I fully expect William to take the first dime he receives from panhandling and buy 10 shares of AMZNQ. >well what is there left to say, but -- have they lived on other worlds before?

To: GST who wrote (79473)	10/3/1999 10:11:00 PM
From: Victor Lazlo	Respond to of 164684

"Pay no attention to that man behind the curtain !! .... "

To: GST who wrote (79473)	10/3/1999 10:25:00 PM
From: Bob Kim	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 164684

GST, Most of what Blodget said is not really any different from what he said in March when he started coverage at Merrill. Back then he also cited the biotech analogy. The only thing that might be alarming to his employer is that he said the cycle was ending. That could make his bosses second-guess why they have at least doubled the size of his group since he first came aboard, with at least one hire having come on board as recently as mid-August. The other concern that his employer might want to worry about is that the cited risk of 75% downside goes against his ratings. All of his long-term ratings are Buy, even though he has suggested multiple times that many internet companies may not survive beyond the next few years, if even that. It might be tough to explain in a deposition, why he kept positive ratings on stocks and continued to recommend their purchase, even when he apparently expected them to decline 75% and in some cases had published price targets that were well below current trading levels.