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 : All Clowns Must Be Destroyed -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: fut_trade who wrote (11173)	2/19/2000 10:09:00 AM
From: Just_Observing	Respond to of 42523

What today's NY Times says about Greenspan's testimony: "But with Thursday's testimony, Mr. Barbera said, Mr. Greenspan took away the hope for further big stock rallies and warned that the stock market could fall more than a little. Mr. Greenspan said that he would "raise interest rates enough to cap the annual rise in the stock market to no more than the rise in personal income, roughly 6.5 percent." That is well below the strong double-digit annual returns of the last five years. " Did he really say that? In any case, the market looks like a big ship going down. One side is under water (DOW near the October lows) and so everyone is rushing to the high side (NASDAQ up 70% since October). This 17 trillion dollar luxury liner is about to crack in the middle. Especially if Greenspan really said what the NY Times reports.

To: fut_trade who wrote (11173)	2/19/2000 10:31:00 AM
From: Oblomov	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 42523

>> Do you recall a time in history ... This narrowing has happened many times in this century. For example, see 1928-29, 1956-57, 1961-62, 1971-73, 1976, 1987. Every time, it has preceded a bear market, most of them 6-18 months in duration. I cannot find a period where the narrowing occurred for an extended period without an eventual collapse in the indexes. This is not to say that it can't happen, only that it hasn't happened. >> At any rate I don't want to see a collapse in the equity markets. I want things to stay exactly as they are now. Same here. Over the past 5 years, my net worth has increased many-fold. I will always look back on the late nineties as good times. However, I do not delude myself that the market exists purely to satisfy my desires. The systematic risk in the stock market is greater than it has been in 30 years. IMO.

To: fut_trade who wrote (11173)	2/19/2000 3:36:00 PM
From: pater tenebrarum	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 42523

Peter, yes, there were two instances this century where money began to be concentrated in only a handful of issues. one was the late 1920's, the other 1972/73. both periods preceded the two worst bear markets this century, so your wish that things stay right as they are may well be disappointed. no need to go into the details of what happened after the 1920's mania ended, but the nifty fifty of the early seventies suffered haircuts of between 70-90% in the subsequent bear market and it took between 12 -15 years for them to regain their '72 highs, in spite of their revenues and earnings expanding considerably during the bear phase. as for the big caps holding up the S&P now, have you looked at their charts lately? many big cap favorites have now extremely sick looking price charts.