To: BGR who wrote (66953 ) 10/6/1999 6:35:00 PM From: pater tenebrarum Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 86076
BGR, believe it or not, i was a very avid BTD'er until mid '99. between April and July i began to scale out of my medium to long term investments (alltogether 42 positions in well known blue chip names plus a few more speculative internet related stocks) due to my assessment that the risk/reward didn't cut it for me anymore and switched mostly into the unloved gold sector (where was the efficiency?<G>) and some short positions. some of the stocks i had would have been worth hanging on to a while longer with hindsight, but by and large i was very happy with the realized returns. now as long as one doesn't realize one's returns, they exist only on paper...they're not real at all. i'm well aware that it is hard to time the end of a mania, but i rather miss out on the final push up than risk losing what i have gained. my main reason for assessing risk/reward as unfavorable is the rise in bond yields...it's not the only reason, but the main one. to answer your question why i chose to abandon the market for now in spite of the obvious one-sidedness of the Fed's approach to the bubble, that's simple: this type of manipulation will cease to work at some point. the Japanese stock market, which has always been subject to government intervention and manipulation (as a matter of official policy in fact) proves my point: when the bubble burst, it was impossible to revive it. a decade has passed, Japanese interest rates have been at zero for quite some time, and the market is still 60% below it's highs at the height of the speculative mania. if you believe that it can not happen here "because it's different" you will likely find out that it's not different after all. i'm constantly amazed at people's refusal to see the mania for what it is...but then, that's in the nature of a mania that the participants are for the most part oblivious to it. why, not even AG is sure whether it's a bubble...although his constant references to same actually suggest otherwise. hb