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.

Pastimes : CNBC -- critique. -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Cynic 2005 who wrote (4553)	2/4/2000 10:58:00 AM
From: Blue Snowshoe	Respond to of 17683

grub....3 5s. 909S, BLUE PS Does anyone out there but me think that the woman in IBM commerical about the lady looking for the light she bought online, looks like what Joe K's Mother would look like. Or like Joe with a bad rug. Funny stuff, check it out. CNBC please put up a photo of her and Joe, side by side. Now that's the kind of programming that raises ratings.

To: Cynic 2005 who wrote (4553)	2/4/2000 11:14:00 AM
From: jopawa	Respond to of 17683

Sounds like the rantings of a guy who's been all cash for 3 yrs waiting for the collapse. Jealous of the lady up 140% last yr huh?gg

To: Cynic 2005 who wrote (4553)	2/4/2000 11:40:00 AM
From: capitalistbeatnik	Respond to of 17683

Motley Fool hype is far worse than CNBC hype or even Cramer hype (maybe I'm biased because Cramer went ballistic on ICGE right after I bought and made me a double). Look at CRA and some of the BB posters on the Fool Board. None of these people have a clue as to how the company will make money or even generate future revenues. At least with the AMZN story, you have big top line growth. (I still think AMZN will be the disaster of the year). What really bothers me about the Fool is that these guys use Buffett like language to describe their investment style when in fact it is balls to the walls speculation. They also tend to confuse excitement about what the company does (yes genomics is cool) with the money making possibilities (how are you going to make money competing with freely distributed public info from the human genome project). Even sadder, many of these investors have put in a sizable chunk of their IRA (one guy admitted 75 percent) because they are counting on genomics cos. not only to make money but cure their disease. So they are "invested" in these companies to an unreasonable degree. I foresee a lot of mental breakdowns if these stocks fall. At least Hymowitz (sp?) admitted the speculative nature of the play. CRA's own prospectus emphasizes the importance of patents, a controversial area that the PTO is cracking down on right now. Motley Fool's endorsement is basically dismissive of the whole issue, saying that "discoveries" are patentable (not necessarily true) and that the patents don't matter anyway. Also the Fool valuation of CRA is based on relative value to Internet comapnies and anticipated future market cap, not earnings or even revenues, which in itself is dubious.