SI
SI
discoversearch

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 : Market Gems:Stocks w/Strong Earnings and High Tech. Rank -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: kendall harmon who wrote (72640)11/21/1999 4:46:00 PM
From: Jenna  Read Replies (2) | Respond to of 120523
 
True for investors, readers of Barron's and those that will be holders of Gillette, BMY, and other 'non-movers' exhibiting no volatility, nor appreciable price moves to the upside. Traders are weaned on volatility, the more the better. In fact position traders and intermediate holders are also becoming 'fans' and buyers of more volatile equities. The criteria has to be high estimated earnings velocity and acceleration quarter after quarter and very high revenue growth for this to 'work' with longer time holders.

Volatility is not for investors because you don't want the stock that has gone up 30% in a year to be down 30% in a few days.. Paradoxically its the lack of volatility that kills these DOW and certain NYSE equities. You get a slow mover with 30% gain and suddenly it can get wiped out within a day or two with some news on earnings, or just insitutional malaise.. and leaving the stock in droves.

Technology stocks are where the money is. The stocks are volatile and will remain volatile, but they will be volatile to the upside with higher highs and lower lows. If Barron's and NYT don't like it they malign the daytraders.. its actually boring and predictable. I just did an re-analysis of CCUR an earnings play from August 10, 1999 by myself... thereby saving $150 by getting the report from First Boston.
209.238.58.242



To: kendall harmon who wrote (72640)11/21/1999 6:39:00 PM
From: Sam Raven  Respond to of 120523
 
Kendall,

This was an interesting story, thanks for posting it.

You have to wonder where the "frequent traders" were between the periods of high volatility? It was not too long ago that analysts were commenting how little volatility there was. Though volatility may indicate market risk, the connection of a market slide due to "frequent traders" is pretty weak.

Sam
www.savvy-trader.com