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

To: Voltaire who wrote (10261)	4/1/2000 12:04:00 AM
From: Percival 917	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 35685

Hi Tom, Not sure if you saw CNBC back when Q had their 156 point day, but that was when they first started the Qualcomm chant. That was all they could talk about the whole morning and every time Q was brought up they did the chant. Did not see it this time but it well may have been an extension of the last time due to the upgrade news. JMHO, Joel

To: Voltaire who wrote (10261)	4/1/2000 8:54:00 AM
From: Gregory	Respond to of 35685

I miss part of the conversation, but I get the drift and totally agree with it. I just want to add that it is unbeleivable how far they are allowed to go. I know that SEC watches and makes real strong attempts policing Internet. They most probably do not have a lot of resources to do it, but once somebody compains about the abuses they see use to hype or degrade some stocks, they do intervene and make the chat rooms,etc,etc, to take wrong messages from the boards. As far as media goes; it seems that anything goes; anything is allowed. I guess the story is really very simple; It is the power that is behind media that tells SEC not to try to shut them up. And the damage that networks do to investors is huge. Because people learned they should not buy stocks from the phone when somebody who is professional and knows pcychology behind buying and selling pushes them in the corner. By now more or less educated people know that the easy and the most effective thing is to hang up. On the contrary with networks most of the people beleive that the big name attached to the pitch (NBC or Salomon Brothers) means they are protected from fraud and should just follow big names in their decision. I beleive the reason it did not happen is because the law is written in such a way that it is impossible to prove their wrongdoing. Only if there would a lawsuits with a huge number of claims something will start. The laws are written in such a way that all stock sales are separated in 2 categories: solicited and unsolicited. Solicited is very strictly regulated and it is a general rule that only licensed people can do it. So, if they abuse their power they get penalized. Unsolicited buying of the stock is not regulated. And when media gives to the investor advice on what to do with certain stocks it is in 99.9% goes without any punishment. Just think about it. If the media could essentially do anything they wanted in president's affair with Monika Levinsky where a lot of people that really know the law were involved and nobody could really stop the media. I am not saying that the were supposed to be stopped; but there was not really in attampt done to do it. So in the case of the stock nobody even tries. The power that media has is very big. Professional people do know it. In this centuary all the big wars autrosities on the people happened not just with guns. Just look at how far Soviets went with their ideology on every continent. Even today there is still bloody things happenning in Africa, South America, Asia as a result of this propaganda. The whole change in power during Russian revolution happened almost without any fight because people that were leading the revolution knew the power of propaganda and how effective it is. On the other end the Soviet empire felt appart without drop of blood. Pretty imazing. But what about BBC, voice of America broadcasting for tens of years before the collapse? Pretty imazing. Anyway I totally agree that media has to be somehow made responsible for what they do. They eventually removed cigarette advertising and should remove stock promotion or have to be real carefull in the way they talk about the stock. It should be regulated and also brought to public attention that they must be really carefull. Because the public does jump exactly the way the media pull the strings. And I do beleive that a lot of times even the commentators themselves do not understand themselves that they also jump as somebody behinf their backs that has a financial gain is pulling the strings. Cheers; Greg

To: Voltaire who wrote (10261)	4/1/2000 12:08:00 PM
From: pinhi	Respond to of 35685

V, JW, and porch, Saw an add in this am's Investors Business Daily for MRSTOCK.COM. They are an online broker that seems to specialize in options. Took a real quick look at their site and it looked interesting. Thought the porch might be interested. Any comments? Pinhi

To: Voltaire who wrote (10261)	4/1/2000 9:44:00 PM
From: Ruffian	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 35685

This was posted last night on one of my other boards, WAVX. This looks like the closest thing to a possible reality I've seen for the crazy stock swings. What do ya think? --uphilldeb Good evening? Picture this?.. I am a mutual fund manager invested in high-tech stocks. For the last quarter I have managed to pull out a decent gain even though the market has been very tough to say the least. The end of the quarter is near and I know that I should dress up my portfolio before I issue my quarterly report. I will need to sell some of the losers and buy some of the winners in my portfolio so the shareholders remain confident in my abilities. I should determine what I need to sell and make adjustments before the end of the week. (This was the psychology going into Monday) On Tuesday Abbey Joseph Cohen issues a cautionary statement about high tech stocks. She doesn't say she is pulling out, she only says she is no longer overweighting the sector. This shakes the market a little initially, but then everything gets better. However some managers think they better hurry up and sell the stocks they have chosen to sell so they do so. They hold the QCOM and CSCO types of course. On Wednesday this is followed up by 6 additional bear-side analysts chosen by CNBC to support those comments. 1 mutual fund manager, Mark Mobius, is an emerging country analyst and doesn't even cover US tech or Net stocks in the first place who has a horrible track record in the second place. More mutual fund managers join in the selling, and now a bunch of retail sellers join the party too. All of a sudden we have a snowball rolling downhill and starting to build momentum. By Thursday everyone wishes they had sold and any sign of gains are met with heavy selling pressure. The institutional buyers let the prices drop and decide they will only try to buy all they can at the rock bottom. Every Manager begins to not only sell his losers but also sells his winners to lock in gains and save face for the quarter. The fear and panic escalates, and there is no end in sight. No bull-side analysts are chosen by CNBC to refute this bearish point of view so the NASDAQ continues to decline on that momentum. Finally buy ratings begin to come in late on Thursday and the market begins to look healthy in the last few minutes of the day. Questions: Does Abbey Joseph Cohen and the rest of the analysts featured on CNBC realize that they were making VERY negative comments in the front of likely heavy selling pressure anyway? How can they justify making calls like this during the final week of the quarter when they know how mutual fund managers treat the 'window dressing' issue? Does it make sense? Yes, is my answer, if they wanted the market to decline so they could buy cheaply. Next, how can CNBC feature all bear-side analysts and no bull-side analysts for 3 straight days? This is a disservice to the investment public. I personally know 2 very well respected bull-side analysts who wanted to be featured. CNBC was riding the momentum and has added to the fears considerably. Combined these two issues are the cause of the market dip and it's continuation this week. This dip should not have taken place; it had just taken place a week ago! There are no fundamental changes in the market. I know all of the bull side analysts bought high-tech stocks at the end of the day today, and the NASDAQ will recover immediately tomorrow. Earnings begin next week, and you can bet that the high-tech companies will be leading the way. The bear analysts surely will watch their firms buy these high tech companies and I bet they currently agree that the prices are acceptable. The icing on the cake is when CNBC brought Barton Biggs on tonight. As a former MSDW broker I know that Biggs gets paid to be bearish. He has never been bullish. He has been a bear for 20 years straight. That was the last sign that we have seen a bottom in my opinion. I pull out my hair and teeth when I get caught in this game, and I admit that I am caught right in the middle. The question begs itself: what should we do? The answer is try to hold what you have. Do not sell out of fear. A week from now those same analysts who fueled the Abbey-Syndrome will re-issue buy recommendations in the sector, and their sheep will be buying at the high prices. Don't be sheep, be shepherds! Lead the way, and buy at the lows. These prices are the best that you will see for the year in the high tech sector. Buy as much as you can. You will look back at this in a week and thank the Blue Monkey that you did. If you are leveraged to the hilt, just hold tight, everything will be much better in a few days.