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.

Strategies & Market Trends : MDA - Market Direction Analysis -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: jbe who wrote (46425)	4/15/2000 1:24:00 AM
From: HG	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 99985

jbe, I normally don't post here for personal reasons, but do follow few people and their analysis...I just hope the thread does not flame this perma bull... Couldn't help but make an observation on the Buy and Hold comment... I started with CSCO in 87. Added on most every dip......for years it was the only core holding I had... Last year I added CMGI to the list....and yes, it has often frustrated me, but even after such a major crash (?), when I'm positive on it...I know I'll be fine from now on..... Buy and hold requires a studied pick and infinite patience, but boy, once you are outta the woods....you're outta the woods...and although I aim for a 25% return per year on the long term holdings...>100% has been the norm and wouldn't hurt <ggg> Of course past performance is no guarantee of future performance - still...its a possibility... BWDIK ? I am a stoopid spekulator...

To: jbe who wrote (46425)	4/16/2000 4:40:00 PM
From: pater tenebrarum	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 99985

jbe, there's an interesting study by James Stack of Investech that shows that 'buy-and-hold' at the tail-end of a secular bull market is the worst investment strategy one can follow. for long term investors the study recommends a mechanical strategy that sells when the S&P falls below its 200-dma and buys back in when it rises above it. this helps one to avoid the better part of bear markets, and ensures bull market participation. it is true that over long periods of time, stocks have an upward bias. but the fact remains, that after several years of excessive gains, long periods of extreme underperformance have usually followed. i saw Glassman once explaining in an interview how it wouldn't have been a bad thing to buy the top in 1929. after all, it took only until 1954 for the Dow to regain that top...:) he forgot to tell people how many of the companies and investment trusts listed in '29 disappeared in the following years. so what were you supposed to be invested in? and how much better would it have been to SELL in 29, and buy at a 90% discount in '32... regards, hb