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.

Non-Tech : Bill Wexler's Dog Pound -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: RockyBalboa who wrote (6136)	1/16/2000 11:46:00 AM
From: Dale Baker	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 10293

The crux of the bear argument is that tech leaders "will not deliver" because they "simply got ahead of themselves". But no one can give an operational definition of how or why the leaders will "stop delivering" if their growth prospects are great and a flood of cash keeps coming in the market trying to buy the limited number of shares they issue. The bears object largely because these stocks don't fit the model that "everyone" just "knows" is universally true and applicable to all 11,000 stocks that trade in the US. Define "getting ahead of themselves" - by some traditional metric, new metrics or just gut instinct? Plenty of Internuts have been cut by 50% or more and the overall tech trend continues. VUSA dies and CMRC thrives. That is hardly reason to say "game over". The argument remains the same - the bull must die because the bull must die. Totally circular and unprovable untiil it happens. If it happens. Where will today's investor put their money if techs have a 20% correction? Bonds? CD's? Under their mattress? They seem to be way beyond that now.