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 : Value Investing -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: jeffbas who wrote (9293)	12/14/1999 3:23:00 AM
From: Paul Senior	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 78549

Yes, I started a small position in PRD last week. For most people though, it's a stock to bypass. Too many negatives. (-g-, Sorry.) Management-- man, they really get criticized by everyone. They do well for themselves it seems, yet the stockholders and employees suffer. No matter who's running the business, the management team cannot deliver performance. An on going problem for at least a decade. In addition to the Kodak and Fuji conventional film war, Polaroid now of course has the digital camera boom to contend with. Here are three aspects of Polaroid which I am considering, or have considered: 1. They're really a technology company. The boom will be in their smart cards, other things-- not instant film. (I'm still trying to understand if this is a reasonable argument. I suspect they will be tied darn close to instant photography.) 2. PRD's I-Zone Instant Pocket Camera is the Number 1 selling camera in the USA. After only 2 months in the market, according to PRD's press release. (This is one reason I bought the stock). PRD also claims the #2 and #3 "fastest selling" cameras. Counter argument: Data is for a short period of time, nobody knows if the sales have "legs", and there is some question whether sales - the camera, the film - will actually translate to bottom line profits. Some people say it could very well be profitless. PRD has not ever been able to produce another significant and profitable new product, I suspect. 3. In the four previous times in the past 14 years when PRD was at this level, the stock rallied. I'm betting it will happen again. Counter argument: pretty poor reason for buying the stock. Especially as the company may have been stronger in earlier years. Paul

To: jeffbas who wrote (9293)	12/14/1999 11:23:00 AM
From: Mike 2.0	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 78549

Jeffrey IMHO Polaroid is a perennial "poisonous dented can." I have no interest in owning a Polaroid camera, people (including myself) now interested in digital cameras, and being able to post photos on web, etc. The last time I remember anyone use a Polaroid camera was to take a photo of my VIN on my car for insurance purposes a year ago. Truth! This cuts to the heart of why I am moving on to a growth investment strategy vs. trying to figure out which "dented can" is OK and which are poisonous. IMO an investment in Polaroid as a "value" stock (as opposed to short term trading) requires you to disregard new evolution in technology (digital cameras, lessening demand in high-end cameras have resulted in less expensive yet good quality 35mm point and shoot cameras), and assume the status quo is going to continue: "people will always want instant photography." IMO...instant photography is a slowly dying business. If anything Polaroid is worth watching as a short. JMO. Best of luck, all.