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 : Gorilla and King Portfolio Candidates -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Mike Buckley who wrote (13802)	1/1/2000 9:25:00 PM
From: gdichaz	Read Replies (4) \| Respond to of 54805

Mike: The discussion about the book is most interesting, since the question of course is which version? Does this thread confine itself to the original and ignore the revision? That is the way I interpret the idea that any Godzilla discussion belongs on the "other thread." The other fun part of the discussion of Geof Moore's credentials is that the book was written by a committee of three. Entire chapters were the product of different people, but it was pulled together by Geof Moore as overall editor, no? But are the ideas, vision and insights his alone? Is he to be credited with them as his because he did not edit them out? Suggest that the origins are a bit more complicated than that an ex English professor sat down and wrote the book in its entirety. And there was an attempt at consensus of course. One of the most interesting aspects of the "revision" is that it shows every sign of being a work in progress which was cut off due to time constraints. Does anyone else who has read both versions have a similar conclusion? Will be most interesting to see what the version next year contains. This thread has its own history and culture. Assume that stands. Best as always. Cha2

To: Mike Buckley who wrote (13802)	1/2/2000 11:20:00 PM
From: Uncle Frank	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 54805

>> As if you're not bitter about him stealing Gemstar and Siebel. I'm not sure that characterizing promotions as "stealing" was very kind, but I'm sure you were just being "humorous" <g>. >> Because I get a little hazy about the exact purpose of the G&K index, I'm not sure if this information, ummm opinion, helps make the decision about whether or not to include it in the index. The GKI is whatever we decide will be most useful, Mike. Last year it was a shopping list of all the G&K types we could think of. This year I proposed that it be a reflection of the typical Ggamer's portfolio, based on the statistical analysis contributed by Apollo. I've enjoyed the debate, and am gratified that everyone has strong opinions, but have yet to sense a consensus. Any suggestions? uf