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.

Technology Stocks : Qualcomm Incorporated (QCOM) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Uncle Frank who wrote (70909)	4/19/2000 1:25:00 AM
From: jmanvegas	Respond to of 152472

UF: Here's my final swing and then let's drop it, ok. I couldn't verify the boob tube statement. Others heard that statement on CNBC, I'm sure. I have only used voodoo TA in 99% of my previous posts to support by "dead money" theory. I never stated QCOM had a negative outlook. I stated the market had negative tones to it, thereby possibly causing even further downward moves in QCOM regardless of good long-term fundamentals. The fact that you said I was one of the worst detractors on this thread based on one incorrect, should-have-been-verified post written this morning is utterly amazing in itself. I don't deny that incorrect post. Do you think that one post caused QCOM to be down in price today. It's up afterhours -be happy. One incorrect post and you get burned at the stake here. Is that how you play the game, UF? The real fact of the matter appears to be that your bothered about my "dead money" theory. Are you going to say that I've been wrong since January. It is now closing in on May. Still in "dead money" territory. The fact that your denial of that is also amazing. Are you feeling pain UF? I know I am after these last 2 weeks. C'est la vie. Still buying or holding that G&K candidate GMST, which you've been losing on big time. Listen, we've all been through a lot. I wish you good health and good fortune in your investment endeavors. Now let's get on with business, as you say. Go ahead, you can take another swing at me. I can take it. Lastly, I don't know who designated you thread cop here and you ain't my uncle so stop talking to me like I'm some little nephew of yours. You can pull that B.S on others here, not me. Your turn. jmanvegas

To: Uncle Frank who wrote (70909)	4/19/2000 2:32:00 AM
From: Uncle Frank	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 152472

Why I've chosen to be an optimist: I do a massive amount of due diligence on a company before I decide that I want to be a part owner. I re-visit that decision on a regular basis, and if I feel their fundamentals have changed for the worse, I retire my position. But if the business is prospering and I have confidence in the wisdom of its management team, I extend my period of ownership. Economic and market conditions have significant impact on my investment, but since no one has the ability to predict them to any degree accuracy, I regard them as an unavoidable part of risk/reward equation. On the other hand, history documents that the market has recovered from every single correction or crash. I believe the best chance I have to prosper is to buy partial ownership of great companies, and to maintain ownership for lengthy periods. My definition of a great company is one that is leading its sector, growing at a fast pace, and generating excellent profits. The market has always rewarded great companies with higher valuations than lesser enterprises. There will be earthquakes and tornados and wars over the coming years, someday we'll die, and in the far future, Sol will turn nova and destroy every planet in our solar system. I'll make sure I am emergency prepared, write a will, and won't waste much energy worrying about entropy. Rathers, I'll try to focus on the wonderful experiences that life offers. I try to verify every fact in my posts, though I'm less rigorous about offering my opinions. I only feel it fair to warn you that, should you read one of my posts, it will generally be optimistic. uf