SI
SI
discoversearch

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 : The Critical Investing Workshop -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: Voltaire who wrote (10090)3/31/2000 9:00:00 AM
From: Detail-MD  Respond to of 35685
 
Voltaire/Porch: Been away from the porch since early Feb.setting up a new fund/computer system.
CNBC talking about QCOM again (7:48 CST). They have a recorded "QCOM chant" that they keep playing in the background. They say it is from the "QCOM God". Talking about Salamon's upgrade. You may or may not think it is funny, but surely adds some attention to the Q.

Am I to understand that a new time capsule will begin April 1? How long will it last? Last April we saw a tech correction beginning in early April.

V-As always, many thanks for taking the time and effort to share your insights and for having the patience to endure people's criticisms.



To: Voltaire who wrote (10090)3/31/2000 9:07:00 AM
From: mrs goldberg  Respond to of 35685
 
Voltster is it true what Dealer is telling me, that because of Leap year the Quarter ended yesterday???? Geez she should have been a blonde!



To: Voltaire who wrote (10090)3/31/2000 9:57:00 AM
From: Jim Willie CB  Respond to of 35685
 
VoltMan, I doubt Naz will continue running hard & fast in April/ May

gonna see a mild runup into earnings for sure
but gonna see some May head scratching consternation selling

May month will be critical for many things:
- consolidating after the 3rd 10% Naz correction
- joining forces with available funds as some like Value die
- observe continued tech growth trends as they resume
- watchful over internet crash&burns, frequently occurring
- questioning over valuations across tech horizon, more scrutiny coming
- seeing if interest rates subside as the FedRes might be close to finishing as elections approach
- crude oil prices remain off these recent highs as OPEC raises production a small but symbolic amount

I expect minor rally fakes for NazComp in next six weeks
gonna be hard to obtain solid footing
too much money was lost on peaking biotechs and techs alike this month
gonna see more scrutiny, prudence, demands for profit growth

gonna be WAR between NAZ and NYSE

Naz giving up its 100 pts gains early
might see one more scare at 4430-4450
Galvin saw declining orders and volume for stockmarket
that needs to improve and might next week
IT HAD BETTER IMPROVE

/ Jim Willie



To: Voltaire who wrote (10090)3/31/2000 11:15:00 AM
From: Gregory  Respond to of 35685
 
Old money vs New money.

First i want to make a disclaiment. I am not guru in explaining market behaviour rationally. First I know very little abouth the mechanisms such as how goverment influences market behaviour. I am acting solely as an outsider. But sometimes if you know little it allows you to disregard certain variables, just because they happen to be the nose and really do not participate in the equation.
Again I realize that this is just the guts feeling, intuition or whatever you call it:

1. There is a lot of money invested in the old type of companies (Coca Cola, Nabisco, etc,etc). And this is not just individual small investors but predominantly huge funds,pension funds, whatever real BIG BIG money.
2. The people that manage them (most probably some of these funds somehow are directly linked to federal money. Again
I do not how exactly, but there must be because people that manage federal money are mostly conservative and should behave as big fund managers).

3. These people, (majority of them) by now really beleive more that old money will not get better but will get worse. This is very similar to the time when small framers became unneeded because new technology (tractor in agriculture) came up.

4. I am not saying that people will not drink coca cola and they will just look at virtual computer picture.

5. What I mean is that is somebody has a $100 and invests it in coca cola and another guy invests it in a stable good blue chip technology (not even CSCO but IBM?). The second guy will do better. So the first guy
even he was a very reluctant and stubborn fellow by now realizes he should do something.

6. He can not do anything, because he has only 2 choices:
6.1 sell Coca Cola with the loss and buy IBM and wait
until IBM makes enough money so he can forget about the loss.
6.2 wait until Coca Cola comes back in price, so they
sell it.

7. At this point there is no mechanism how to make Coca
Cola stock to come up in price.

8. So, at this point it is just the market behaviour some money today come out tech and flows to bail coca cola out.

9. I do not know. I did not follow it. Maybe it will help to bring coca cola to the level where you can get rid of it (sell) withou big loss.

10. what is necessary is the mechanism hat will allow to make it faste. I am not a specialist in economics but my intuition tells me it is very difficult task to do. Essentually you have to do something to manipulate markets strongly enough to achieve your goal and at the same time not to hurt other parts of the market that are not guilty just because now there is a tractor instead of bare handes.



To: Voltaire who wrote (10090)3/31/2000 11:36:00 AM
From: stockman_scott  Respond to of 35685
 
Is the Music Over?...

<<By Aaron L. Task
Senior Writer
3/30/00 10:14 PM ET

SAN FRANCISCO -- Stop. Hammer time.

Reports of technology stocks' demise have been greatly exaggerated in the past, but investors seem now to be adhering to the "can't touch this" mantra when it comes to the sector.

The Nasdaq fell 187 to 4457.89 Thursday, recovering more than 100 points from its intraday worst, but still closing 11.7% below its all-time high of 5048.62. More important than sliding into "correction" territory, the index is now below its 50-day moving average of around 4542.

"We have all been spoiled by the spectacular gains we've achieved over the past five months in particular, and the last five years in general," Charles Payne, president and chief analyst at Wall Street Strategies, wrote in an email to clients Thursday. "However, it is time to adjust our expectations. Realize the blistering runs will be fewer and farther between. Learning to protect your profits is the key."

I've always found Payne to be an excellent barometer of the aggressive, daytrading-type investors who are his clients, so I don't take those comments lightly. Meanwhile, something must have changed because I don't recall CNBC ever "suspending commercials," as it did Thursday, no matter how dicey the market got.

That the Comp clawed back above 4455 -- the intraday low hit March 16 -- cheered some market watchers (and its cheerleaders). But many Wall Street types report a sense of "gloominess" and "edginess" about where things go from here.

"There's caution in the wind," said one trader. "People are afraid to make the first move. No one has a clue where we're going."

One person who's had a clue in recent years is Joe Battipaglia, chairman of investment policy at Gruntal.

As you might expect, Battipaglia was largely unfazed by the selloff Thursday. Paradoxically, the fact the action in the over-the-counter market was so "indiscriminate" suggests the selling is "not sustainable," the strategist argued. "This is not some reaction to some event that says the world is changing for the worse. We've had a market that has had a tinge of momentum. That works on either side of positive or negative."

Furthermore, Battipaglia noted that for all the noise about the Nasdaq, Dow and S&P 500, the "aggregate value of equities has moved sideways this year." Indeed, the Wilshire 5000 Total Market Index is up just 2.3% year to date.

Thus, the Federal Reserve is in a position to "sit back and watch, on the theory that what they did last year is starting to have an effect," he said. Battipaglia expects the Fed to hike at its May 16 meeting (as is widely believed) but then take a more passive stance (which is the subject of more contention).

Perhaps the Fed will take the summer off and provide salvation to a market that could use some "good" news from somewhere (anywhere). But didn't bullish strategists such as Battipaglia have a responsibility to warn investors of the downside risks during the "up" phase of the momentum?

Contrasting himself to fellow gurus (perceived or otherwise) such as Goldman Sachs' Abby Joseph Cohen and Prudential's Ralph Acampora, who focus on the averages, Battipaglia believes "the indices will take care of themselves; it's the stocks you own that make the difference."

Battipaglia's portfolio is up for the year, and he expects additional gains, noting stocks he owns such as Intel (INTC:Nasdaq - news - boards), IBM (IBM:NYSE - news - boards) and Johnson & Johnson (JNJ:NYSE - news - boards) "are not at price levels where I would sell them."

But Intel, IBM and J&J aren't exactly "highfliers," I noticed with my keen sense of the obvious. What about those?

"As I have said before, I think Internet stocks -- which I don't play typically -- even if they corrected massively, will not take the market down in a structural way," he replied. The Comp nearly set a new high last week even though the biotechs were in the midst of a "massive correction," he noted. That's because "the market value of those companies is minor," he said. "If you owned them, it's major. But I didn't tell you to buy them."

At least there's one Wall Street player who won't have any trouble sleeping tonight.

In the Trenches
Another TaskMaster favorite -- Anthony Cecin, manager of Nasdaq trading at U.S. Bancorp Piper Jaffray -- offered a different perspective on the action but a similarly sanguine conclusion.

"I'd hardly call what's going on a disaster or a panic," Cecin said. "We're in markets that, by their nature, are going to be much more volatile than they've historically ever been. Participants have to get used to that -- not comfortable [with it], but used to it, because that's the way I see the markets going for the foreseeable future."

At the end of the quarter, comments from Abby Cohen and Mark Mobius, as well as the developments at Tiger Management, created a "confluence of events" this week that caused the market to sell off, Cecin said.

But the Nasdaq is still up 9.5% year to date, and with the amount of money still flowing into equity funds, it's possible "we might have seen the intraday lows," the trader said. Regardless, "I'm not seeing evidence you've got to throw in the towel here."

I know that does you little or no good if you bought stocks such as Vignette (VIGN:Nasdaq - news - boards), Ventro (VNTR:Nasdaq - news - boards) or Emulex (EMLX:Nasdaq - news - boards) at their respective heights.

But here's another piece of evidence: The Comp is still about 33% above its 200-day moving average of 3347.

To some, that says the index is still in an extremely bullish mode. To others, it suggests the Comp still has a long way to go down.

To me, it says it's not too late to diversify, take profits and/or examine closely what it is you're invested in, and why. In other words, to do the things that seemed so passe way back when, in the "glory" days. (Earlier this month, that is.)

Postscript
This weekend, I'll be making my (hopefully) triumphant return to "TheStreet.com" on cable TV's Fox News Channel, so please tune in. The show airs Saturdays at 10 a.m. and 6 p.m. EST, and Sundays at 10 a.m. EST. If you're not already watching, you now have added incentive.

--------------------------------------------------------
Aaron L. Task writes daily for TheStreet.com. In keeping with TSC's editorial policy, he doesn't own or short individual stocks, although he owns stock in TheStreet.com. He also doesn't invest in hedge funds or other private investment partnerships. He welcomes your feedback at taskmaster@thestreet.com. >>



To: Voltaire who wrote (10090)3/31/2000 3:14:00 PM
From: William Hunt  Respond to of 35685
 
Voltaire ---Good call on the afternoon session

BEST WISHES
BILL



To: Voltaire who wrote (10090)3/31/2000 4:36:00 PM
From: Tecinvestor  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 35685
 
Votaire, would it be fair to say, then, that the remarks of the likes of Abbey Joseph Cohen and Mobius were orchestrated and perfectly timed to create panic in the minds of the small investor so as to free up shares that will then be absorbed, at a discount, by the funds?



To: Voltaire who wrote (10090)5/19/2000 6:50:00 AM
From: stockman_scott  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 35685
 
V and my good friends up on the porch: I hope you are all doing well....

I have been traveling and trying to ignore this schizophrenic market <G>....It seems like VERY few investors have a long term focus or a lot of conviction...I have been too busy to make any changes in the last few months.....did a little buying when we had the big sell-off....of course I could have waited and picked up market leaders at a deeper discount..;-)...I'm surprised the Nasdaq hasn't started to rebound more decisively....The Fed has done what folks have been predicting and the tech companies are delivering very solid earnings reports....Hmmm...Below, I have attached an interesting article from yesterday's LA Times....How's 'the View from the Porch' as we approach June..?? I sure wish I had some extra cash to do a little bargain hunting this spring...There are some GREAT companies on sale...Oh well, I'll just be patient for now.

Best Regards,

Scott

-----------------------------------------------------
Thursday, May 18, 2000 | LaTimes.com

Tech Highfliers Failing to Regain Momentum

Wall Street: Cisco Systems, among the most sought-after stocks earlier this year, is nearing April low. Microsoft, Agilent, Intel also are faltering.

By TOM PETRUNO, Times Staff Writer

<< "Buy His Stock" declares the May cover of Worth magazine, emblazoned with the smirking mug of Cisco Systems Chief Executive John Chambers.
"No thanks," many investors suddenly are saying about the computer networking giant's shares.
The same Cisco Systems that was one of the most sought-after technology stocks earlier this year--and which briefly became the most valuable company on the planet in March--is struggling to stay above its closing low price reached in the mid-April tech-stock plunge.
On Wednesday Cisco shares led the tech sector lower again, falling $2.56, or 4.2%, to end at $58. That is the lowest close since the stock finished at $57 on April 14 in the massive Nasdaq market meltdown.
The continued selling pressure on many tech stock leaders is discouraging analysts and investors alike who had hoped that the sector's mid-April lows marked the bottom for the market.
At its closing low on April 14, the Nasdaq composite index, of which Cisco is a major component, fell to 3,321.29, a stunning 34.2% drop from the record high close of 5,048.62 reached on March 10.
The tech sector then bounced back, pushing the Nasdaq index to as high as 3,958 on May 1. But renewed selling has kept many tech issues under pressure since.
The latest attempt at a sustained rally ended Wednesday, when the Nasdaq index fell 72.61 points, or 2%, to 3,644.96 after rising for four days. Even that rally had disappointed some pros, because it occurred amid light trading volume.
Nasdaq's biggest stocks are key to determining the market-capitalization-weighted index's trend. And amid the tech-stock plunge of late March and early April, a popular notion on Wall Street was that the biggest tech issues would hold up well, because many investors would never abandon names that had become "must own" stocks of the so-called new economy.
Cisco was perhaps revered above all others because of the company's stellar earnings growth over the last decade, its shrewd management headed by Chambers and its enviable position as one of the principal builders of the global Internet infrastructure.
"Is John Chambers the best CEO on Earth?" asks the cover of the May 15 issue of Fortune magazine.
But at $58 now, Cisco shares have fallen 27.5% from their record high close of $80.06 on March 27. Instead of being a buffer for the Nasdaq index, Cisco now is down about as much as the index overall from its peak.
Other tech-stock leaders also are struggling to regain momentum:
* Microsoft, embroiled in an epic antitrust battle with the federal government, is down 43.6% from its 52-week high. The stock fell $1.81 to $67.69 Wednesday, heading back toward the 52-week low price of $66.19 reached on May 10.
* Agilent Technologies, the test and measuring equipment giant spun off from Hewlett-Packard, slid $10.50 to $78 on Wednesday as investors reacted poorly to the company's quarterly earnings report issued late Tuesday.
The company matched expectations, but analysts now are worried about weaknesses in Agilent's health-care unit. The stock, which soared in March, now has fallen 52% from its peak. Its recent closing low was $76.56 on May 11--and it nearly touched that level at its intraday low Wednesday.
* Intel, down 15% from its peak, is faring better than most tech leaders. Yet the stock gained just $1.31 to $123.19 on Wednesday, even after the company announced a 2-for-1 stock split and an increase in its tiny cash dividend.
Ordinarily, a split announcement by Intel would viewed as a great excuse to buy the stock.
For many investors, the basic problem with the tech leaders may be the problem dogging all tech shares: No matter how great the companies' prospects may appear, the stocks still are extraordinarily expensive relative to earnings--even after their plunge of the last two months. Cisco still is priced at 111 times its expected earnings per share this fiscal year.
It became popular to believe, amid the tech sector's surge in 1999 and early 2000, that valuations didn't matter. But the latest action in the stocks suggests more investors are paying attention to valuations--and don't like what they see.
Briefly: If inflation is really a worry, nobody told the gold market. Gold fell for a third day on Wednesday, reaching an eight-month low. Near-term futures in New York fell $2.40 to $273.10 an ounce. Part of gold's problem is technical: The strong dollar is spurring more sales by foreign gold producers looking to reap currency gains.>>


* * *