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 : A.I.M Users Group Bulletin Board -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: JZGalt who wrote (8796)	10/8/1999 11:57:00 AM
From: Jack Jagernauth	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 18928

Hi Dave, Thanks for the link. I'll have to read it a few more times. I know what you mean about not all picks being winners. I am going on the basis that a small percentage of picks might be big money makers, while some might make a little money, and others will be money losers. Even if 20% (1 in 5) are great money makers, these should more than compensate for the non-performers. What have you found from experience to be the percent of picks that are winners? Thanks again, Jack (pondering about picking efficiency)

To: JZGalt who wrote (8796)	10/8/1999 1:37:00 PM
From: OldAIMGuy	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 18928

Hi Dave, I've reviewed the "Quadrant" graph and descriptions before and find it an interesting way to divide up the Tech Universe of stocks. As an avid AIM user, it looks as though there's possibilities in maybe 3 of the 4 quadrants for AIM management. All but your Quadrant 4 would appear to offer potential for AIM users. Quadrant 2, as you've stated, would limit some of the risks involved by apparent efficient buying. I believe that Vitesse Semi (VTSS) would have qualified as a Q-2 stock back in 1993-4 when I first bought it. Q-3 is sort of a "ride the wave" portion of the map and would be where one would use high cash reserves. Q-1 offers potential but only for those who have the highest risk tolerance and a very fat cash reserve. In the descriptive area you mention that many cyclical tech stocks might miss the chart all together by being at odds between P/E and Growth rates at various times in their cycle. I can fully understand this problem. Lam Research (LRCX)comes to mind as well as Cognex Inc. (CGNX). I own CGNX and have been pleased with AIM's ability to handle its cycles. It continues to grow as well. I never bought Lam, but it certainly offered enough of a buying trough for anyone interested in attempting AIM with it. Cyclical growth stocks present their own problems on "time-value." Are we better off to find a new home for our $$$ during those long dark days of a sector rotation, or just ride out the storm and be content with the new, lower AIM trading range until the clouds blow away? My own M.O. has been to ride out the storms. As long as the underlying fundamentals remain sound and the growth expectations remain "good" for the sector afterwards, I have usually just stayed put. One of the peculiarities of AIMing is that after a while our portfolios have very few losses in them. It's been stated that taxes are not a valid component for deciding whether to sell out of a stock or not. However for me, to pay Uncle his dues, and then re-deploy the assets to a new area where I'm less familiar has always caused me some consternation. Anyway, just thought you might want to know that after reviewing GNSS's customer list, I decided to go ahead and give it a try. I picked up shares at $19-7/16. This is only the second new stock to be added to the Warehouse this year. It's the first of your Q-2 stocks that I've tried. Thanks in "advance" for the help. Let's see how I do!! Best regards, Tom