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 : Gorilla and King Portfolio Candidates -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: om3 who wrote (23626)	4/26/2000 5:47:00 PM
From: Mike Buckley	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 54805

Steve, I'm going to respond to your question about additional thoughts regarding INTF . My first comment is actually in response to Stan's post that I somehow missed until I saw yours. He wrote: For example, if a John Stichnoth or a StockHawk or a Mike Buckley, to name a few, make a recommendation, I'm going to look hard at what they have to say because I feel I 'know' these guys over the last 12 months more than someone who is relatively new. Even if the latter is very competent and very sincere. No dispersions meant on any new people here. But when I ask myself what I would do differently, one would be to take a second and third look when getting information from a lesser known source. Putting me in the company of John and StockHawk is so flattering I think I'll buy the next breakfast for Stan. But I'd bet ten breakfasts that John and StockHawk would agree with me that Stan should ammend his thinking to say that he should get second, third, fourth and fifth looks when getting information from anyone regardless of the confidence he has in the author of a piece that originally piques his interest. As I always say, "Don't make any investment decisions based on the stuff that comes from my keboard. Do your own homework." And I mean it. My second comment is that I'm completely ignorant of the fundamentals behind INTF. I do remember reading the Hunt report and suggesting that people read it as a model of research according to the rules of Gorilla Gaming. But I also remember -- and correct me if I'm wrong -- that the author was very clear that INTF is not playing a Gorilla Game. That in itself should be a red flag that can be seen from one side of the Grand Canyon to the other. So before we begin to wonder about the motives of the author or his employer or the quality of their research, let's now use this as a learning experience by continuing with the discussion about INTF. Is the setback in the price company-specific or market-specific? If there is a setback in the company's fundamentals, how much of a setback is it and how temporary might it or might it not be? What are the long-term implications of everything we have collectively learned about this company? I encourage anyone who invested in the company or decided not to as a result of their own research to pipe in and express some cogent ideas that will shed constructive light on the subject so we can all learn from whatever situation exists. --Mike Buckley

To: om3 who wrote (23626)	4/26/2000 9:33:00 PM
From: Sunny	Read Replies (4) \| Respond to of 54805

I respectfully disagree with you on the pump and dump. IMO, from a valuation perspective, INTF is not a great deal different than ELON in one respect. Both companies have some exciting things going for them in the future but, they have not yet produced the results that justified their valuations. A big difference between these two is that INTF is retooling from a business model that was leading them no where but down and their numbers look terrible. The question we should all ask ourselves when some one paints a very pretty picture about the future of a stock is does it look and smell OK. Earlier this year it was very easy to get caught up in the price to vision ration. These 2 companies certainly garnered a lot of attention from some of the notable contributors on this thread. Does that make Janet or Math guilty of the P&D. I don't think so. These stocks got in front of themselves just as RMBS and several others did. Project Hunt was designed to identify shiny pebbles that may one day become G&K's. In our enthusiasm to get in early we succumbed to our own greed. Q4 1999 and Jan - early March 2000 had all of us often reacting in disbelief of out good fortunes. I will confess to reinforcing my positions in several stocks that, in hind sight were way over valued and I have suffered a similar fate with many of you. The past couple of weeks have been humbling for many of us who thought we were the geniuses of the great bull market. We just learned that Gorillas are not always undervalued in the short term. We also should have learned to invest in quality. There have been a number of people who invested a great deal of time and effort into DDing the HUNT Candidates. Their reports have been factual and have also included their view of the future. We encouraged them, we applauded them for their efforts and many of us bought the stocks after the reports were published. The stocks went up, probably too fast and too high based upon the underlying fundamentals. Some of us got burned. It is our own fault and to attempt to label the Hunt team as P&D artist is wrong minded and seeks to shift responsibility from you for your actions to someone else. As Stan said in his confession, "Do your own DD before you invest your money. Sorry for coming out of the woodwork to rant, but take responsibility for yourself. Sunny

To: om3 who wrote (23626)	4/29/2000 6:15:00 PM
From: StockHawk	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 54805

>>INTF.. trying to turn this into a positive learning experience<< I had some concerns about INTF because it seemed possible that ownership interests may have had some influence on what was being said. Although it is perfectly acceptable for a stock holder, or an employee of a company, to comment on that company, it is human nature to see the good side of companies we are invested in or affiliated with. While we had every indication that the person doing the Hunt Report was a fine individual the fact that he took employment with the company, or the firm of a major shareholder, perhaps could have given some pause. INTF was first mentioned on the G&K (as far as I can tell) with this post: ----------------- To: Snasraway who wrote (7351) From: michel petit Saturday, Oct 2, 1999 3:01 PM ET Reply # 7352 INTF a potential gorilla in e-billing in partnership with IBM and Transpoint(Microsoft) intface.com A lot of trade shows and exposure in the coming weeks. The best performing computer stock for the last 3 months ------------------- Note the stock had moved from the $3 range to around $9 at this time. That poster, michel petit, who frequently posts on the INTF thread, mentioned INTF on the G&K a few more times, usually with one-liners, that never got a response. Later, she proposed INTF as a Project Hunt stock and it was accepted. Mathmagician volunteers for the project, does his report and notes in post 18015 "For the record, I have decided to take a position in INTF as a direct result of facts learned through this investigation." (Give him credit, he was always forthcoming about such items.) Later we learn he has not taken a position with INTF but rather with David Zimmer's company. Mr. Zimmer's filings with the SEC, which were filed in Nov. and Dec. of last year show him to be a major shareholder. The filings do not say when or at what price the shares were purchased but we can infer that the price was in the single digits. On this thread I made a post asking for clarification: Message 13283936 ------------------------------ Re: Clarification on INTF Hunt Report At the end of your fine report you have an Acknowledgment that states : "I would like to thank fellow SI member and major INTF shareholder David Zimmer for his valuable assistance and insight. His contributions comprise a large portion of this report..." You also referenced Mr. Zimmer's SEC filings which I took a look at. Filings made in Nov. and Dec. of last year show him to be beneficial owner of 450,000 shares or approximately 10% of the company. That being the case, I wonder if you could expand on which portions of the report he provided. --------------------------------- What lessons, if any, can we learn from this? This is a stock that traded for under $2 a year ago. It peaked at $82 and recently fell back into single digits before recovering to the teens. See weekly chart: siliconinvestor.com; compare=&time=week&i0=1&chart=bar&i1=0&scale=linear&i2=0&i3=0 Possible lessons: 1. As tekboy pointed out recently, if you are going to play the momo game make sure you get in early - and get out early. 2. Perhaps red flags should go off when a $2 stock becomes a $70 stock in a few weeks or months. We all read stories such as (just making up numbers here): if you bought Microsoft at $1.85 in 1992 by 1999 each share would be worth $800. Perhaps subconsciously such dramatic increases make us think that perhaps we could find that $2 stock that goes on to make us a fortune. The problem with this is that Microsoft probably never really traded for $1.85 that number is split adjusted. Instead it probably traded at $28 but split four times. Often "penny stocks" are penny stocks for a reason, and the reason is rarely good. 3. Perhaps stop loss orders are a good idea. If you are buying a stock that ran from single digits to $50 it may be prudent to put in a stop loss order at $40. At least that way you will not be killed on a major fall. If the $50 stock proceeds to run to $75 then move your stop up to $60, and in that way you lock in a profit no matter what happens. 4. Question everything. And seek out negatives. I think the Project Hunt reports are fantastic but maybe we should add a twist. How about if every company was researched by two people - one to present the report and the other to be Devil's Advocate - with the task of finding out what is wrong with the company . (OK, probably a nutty idea.) 5. Resolve yet again to stick to the knitting. Buy Gorillas, buy Kings, watch shinny pebbles, but do not buy unless they are Falling in price. What? Think about it. It is easy to love a stock that is moving up. Recall RMBS here. How you feel about the stock when it is falling is much more revealing. If you still want to buy, that is probably significant. StockHawk