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: chaz who wrote (23912)	4/30/2000 12:13:00 PM
From: Apollo	Respond to of 54805

INTF... I received several PM's from Mr. Zimmer, essentially "hang in there"..."3:1 split on the way"...That was after I had been stopped out, and it convinced me I had done the correct thing because it seemed so "insiderish"....esp. the split message which would have been a board decision not available to the public. Did many of us receive similar? I received a PM from Math about a rumored 3:1 split. stan

To: chaz who wrote (23912)	4/30/2000 1:02:00 PM
From: Seldom_Blue	Respond to of 54805

Chaz, First I like to comment that I greatly appreciate your work on the Project Hunt. A very time consuming effort, but very helpful to investment novices or old-hands alike. Second, I also appreciate your concern about the potential downfall of such a project. Some people chased stocks that were presented and got burned. While this is a great place to learn, ONE MUST DO HIS OWN DD. Neither the thread, nor the elders, nor Project Hunt, should be responsible for people's own decision to purchase a stock. I bought ELON shortly before the presentation, and I was greatly encouraged by the work presented by Janet. That is why I held through some serious profits (400%), and now down about 30% ( I had options). Those were my decisions, not anyone else's on the thread. INTF. That was a different story. I looked at the financial numbers and its market cap. I could not believe or understand how a company that makes an unproven product, and losing money in its current business, could command its market cap. I never invested. After the stock soared, I revisited it and still could not believe or understand it. So I was lucky to avoid it. I was somewhat alarmed by the possible inside information that was hinted on the thread. But the decision not to invest was based on looking at its business and its profitability. I do not think Project Hunt should be changed to make it more difficult to present a company. We should perhaps include a header in the report that says it is only the work and opinion of the presenter, that people need to do their own DD, and that the conclusion of the report is not the collective opinion of the thread, and that anything one reads on the web may be the work of someone with an evil motive. Some of us learned this through hard lessons. One has to understand that one should never base an investment decision on someone else's opinion. Seldom Blue

To: chaz who wrote (23912)	4/30/2000 2:14:00 PM
From: Uncle Frank	Respond to of 54805

>> Perhaps we need a nominations review committee, two, maybe three others who agree to separately do a quick look at any proposed nomination. If two of three say OK, I'd proceed with finding a Project Leader. I truly appreciate your efforts on Project Hunt, Thucie. You've developed an excellent format in which nominees can be presented and understood in GG terms. There is no way to avoid the possibility of "spin" being put into the reports, but in general, I choose to attribute that to the enthusiasm of the presenters rather than to nefarious motives. Readers must just be aware that an ebullient PH only represents a starting point for their own dd rather than an endorsement from the G&K gang. As far as I'm concerned, one of our earliest PH reports from James Sinclair sets the standard for objectivity. Despite having owned the nominee and had received outstanding returns from it, he came to the conclusion that, based on GG metrics, it wasn't a potential Gorilla or King: people.ne.mediaone.net On the other end of the scale, the following unsolicited PH report was an example of extreme bias and mis-application of G&K metrics: technologyreports.com There is no way to keep "pumpers" from posting, so the only protection against them is our own dd. As always. uf

To: chaz who wrote (23912)	4/30/2000 8:13:00 PM
From: Peter Sherman	Respond to of 54805

i see the real issue as follows - if the pumpanddumporama of INTF deserved a "hunt" - fine - but we knew the author of the report was - 1 - out of the blue 2 - unknown to anyone 3 - and seemed cozy with an entity that had a big position 4 - and was dropping the name of a thread participant who should NOT have wanted public - and SEC reviewable -- publicity 5 - and who was too "eager" to push his firm Caveat Emptor - ah, latin - i knew it would do me well -