SI
SI
discoversearch

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 : Amazon.com, Inc. (AMZN) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: Bill Harmond who wrote (102662)5/2/2000 11:53:00 PM
From: GST  Read Replies (2) | Respond to of 164684
 
William: Thank you for sharing your views and for your good-natured humor. A company like CRA does indeed have something valuable to trade on -- the question is at what price? $256 -- the high for the year? $86 -- their current price? Perhaps $25? In my mind, the case for $25 is far stronger than the case for $256. That is my point. At $86 they are trading at 100 times sales -- far out of line with their prospects IMO. At $25, they trade at 33 times sales -- a very, very rich premium, but perhaps within reason if you want to speculate. As for gold, I think you are deeply mistaken by your comparison. It is always going to be about supply and demand William, whether we are talking gold, biotech or net stocks -- and right now there is a glut of stock coming into the market while gold is going through an extraordinary bottoming process. There is a fortune to be made in gold stocks now -- not in net stocks. Times change. Good luck.



To: Bill Harmond who wrote (102662)5/3/2000 5:49:00 AM
From: re3  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 164684
 
<<<. I just don't share your distressful imaginings

William : if there can be and are short squeezes in internet stocks, why couldn't there be one in a commodity ?

William : is softie's decline of 40 % from the peak a distressful imagining ? qcom declining from 200 to 100

William : what is wrong with putting a few shekels down on an investment that is totally the opposite of the majority of whats in your portfolio ?

HGMCY

it trades on the nasdaq

consider yourself advised



To: Bill Harmond who wrote (102662)5/3/2000 10:37:00 AM
From: Glenn D. Rudolph  Respond to of 164684
 
Lead has an Atomic Weight of 207.2

Gold has an Atomic Weight of 196.96654

I was initially thinking that with all this negativy that bullets made out of gold might be better. I kniw almost nothing about guns and bullets but even an all out war is not going to increase the consumption of gold. Apparently, lead would still be the metal of choice for bullets.

Oh well...