To: mtnlady who wrote (15778 ) 1/20/2000 3:44:00 PM From: John Stichnoth Respond to of 54805
You're right. That is a legitimate point of contention on this thread, where you enter the game. Moore--playing the game strictly by what he says--would have us enter the game after the tornado is confirmed. That way we minimize risk, at perhaps some sacrifice in potential return. The way a lot of people around here play it is more aggressive--trying to anticipate where tornadoes will occur, and buying into the pre-tornado stocks. I think that is a legitimate variation on Moore's idea (but that is a personal decision each of us has to make). Not part of Moore's ideas, it seems to me, is anticipating a product that may create a tornado. That's a two-step process that is removed from GGing. btw, In an earlier post, I think I implied that you had to have reported revenues in order to confirm the tornado. I did not mean to say that. To me, confirmation of acceptance in the mainstream, which will lead inevitably to greatly increased revenues, is sufficient. That is why GMST is to me very close to tornado confirmation, even though their revenues aren't tornadoing. Another example may be SNDK, although they are further away. Both of those companies have created substantial value chains (GMST more so) that will almost necessarily lead to fast growth. I haven't seen such a chain form for CREE, which seems to be keeping the entire vertical integration in house. Remember the importance that Moore places on the market providing critical support to any proclaimed Gorilla. If you keep everything in-house, then no value chain can form. All you've got are customers. Not bad for the short and medium term, but customers can be so fickle! Maybe I'm wrong on CREE's value chain? Best, John