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: pater tenebrarum who wrote (23406)	4/5/2000 9:37:00 PM
From: Activatecard	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 42523

Can you explain exactly what the VIX measures? Thanks! Steve

To: pater tenebrarum who wrote (23406)	4/5/2000 9:39:00 PM
From: Giordano Bruno	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 42523

got TLAB? biz.yahoo.com

To: pater tenebrarum who wrote (23406)	4/5/2000 10:21:00 PM
From: posthumousone	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 42523

Media's In-Line Take on Yahoo! is Out of Line By James J. Cramer 4/5/00 7:52 PM ET Click here for the latest from James J. Cramer. How ridiculous is this Yahoo! (YHOO : - news - boards) situation that no matter what the company does, the media act as if it is in-line? I sat at my office, listening to the TV and watching the tape and trying to figure out how the press can determine instantaneously that this was an in-line quarter? How can they do it? How can they pretend to analyze the situation like this? How can they be this glib? We know Yahoo! cold. We know page-view expectations and gross margin guidance and the benchmarks that firms are looking for, and we still can't make a snap judgment that it was "in-line." The more we pulled it apart, the more we felt it was "better than expected." My, what a sham this whole game has become. It astounds me that journalists can look at a printed number on a page, one number, before charges and revenues and page views, and pronounce it ho-hum. My, would I love to have that luxury in real life. It is one thing to dismiss a candidate's chances running for office. Subjective judgments play a role, so does popular opinion. Instant analysis rules. It is another thing to pronounce a company's quarter as a dud through instant analysis when you can't possibly know anything yet. Of course, we know that in the end business valuations will WILL out. But in the short-term journalists WILL out. Which is why, after that great Yahoo quarter -- and remember these guys would rather be wrong but not be conflicted than to be right but own shares -- Yahoo! traded down dramatically after the report. Hit the 150s in a flash. I know that I write from my positions. I am a commentator. But not owning stock does not give you a license to get it wrong. Yet that's what happened to Yahoo! after the close today. >>>>>>>>>>>>> Can someone please rebut this?