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.

Non-Tech : The Critical Investing Workshop -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: SOROS who wrote (18688)	5/13/2000 11:40:00 PM
From: Voltaire	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 35685

Hi SOROS, With the exception of a couple of bumps - 106 years of ascension says the Negative pundits are wrong - Why? Houses and there little inventory and the Fed has the check book and they work in concert more than ever. relax, I remain - Bullish, V

To: SOROS who wrote (18688)	5/13/2000 11:45:00 PM
From: RR	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 35685

Hi SOROS: Don't think I've ever posted to you, but seen your posts previously. Maybe you read some of mine. If so, you will know my bullish view and why. I respect the arguments you made. I have had a dear investor friend for many years. He is as much a bear as I've seen. He was saying years ago some of the things you mentioned. Month after month he argued with me, granted not about internet as much as you pointed out in your post, but, nonetheless, he made good arguments. Yet, the bulls ran all over him. I still see a very healthy market. The quality techs will do fine, the market will do fine. The generation of investor in the market today will not let it fail. There is so much money available to keep the market sustained, even with the debt arguments you made. The resilience shown is proven. While I think that a number of the internet companies will not make it, the quality techs will, and emerge significantly. Gosh, how many times years and years ago did I hear Intel was dead, that the competition would kill it, that it would run out of innovation, etc..... I learned years ago, never underestimate the quality techs. Realize what I've said is qualified in that I keep talking of the quality techs. Anyway, that's my view for whatever it might be worth. I remain confident we will have a dynamite year. I am not worried. Rick

To: SOROS who wrote (18688)	5/14/2000 12:43:00 AM
From: elpolvo	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 35685

soros- good post. you obviously put a lot of thought into it. harry dent is just the demographic picture painter. you really have to understand the fundamentals of the new economy before you see what's in our future. your reasoning is based upon the old (and somewhat still present) economy. if you read this, i think you'll see things a little differently and it will explain what seems foolish to you now. kevin kelly's new rules for the new economy: wired.com love, -polvie

To: SOROS who wrote (18688)	5/14/2000 2:22:00 PM
From: Ex-INTCfan	Respond to of 35685

Soros, you certainly covered a lot of ground in that post -- too much form me to respond to in one post. I would, however, like to make a few comments. The market may be in serious trouble, but not for the reasons you suggest. Why is "making it easier for individuals to "go into business" and harder for established companies to make money" a bad thing? It seems to me that the end result is increased productivity, as creative and productive resources are unlocked from corporate bereaucracy (I never could spell that word!), and as unproductive middle men (such as some brokers) are eliminated from the equation. You also state "Smart employees leave well-established jobs for quick and bigger bucks. This helps everyone short-term, but it hurts everyone long-term. No one cares about long-term!" I couldn't disagree more! Of course, I am biased. I left a fairly high-paying job at a Fortune 500 company to start my own business. My income dropped, but I am working hard to build the business. In doing so, I am providing services much more efficiently that competitors in the non-Internet space. I'm reaching clients that they couldn't reach before, and I have products that the non-Internet competition does not have. This is not a get-rich-quick scheme for me -- I'm adding value to the clients we serve, and I'm having a lot of fun doing it. Meanwhile, the people at my old firm continue to squabble in committee meetings about the appropriate Internet strategy to use, and they are dead in the water. I do agree with your statement that "It's (the market) been pumped way too high for the past few years based on new economy thinking," at least for certain sectors. Not many people really understand the Internet as it relates to business. There are indeed some fly-by-night companies who tried to take advantage of the public by going public (Dr. Koop et al) with less-than-optimal business plans, or by pumping up the impact of the Internet on their business (Skymall comes to mind). The public was throwing money at any company with a dotcom in its name. The pendulum is beginning to swing the other way, as it always does. The market correction has been healthy. People now are being more careful in evaluating companies. Sure, there still are momentum plays -- there always will be. But the bubble has burst. I suggest a simple mantra -- perhaps clicking your heels together and saying "the Internet is good" a few times in the morning and in the evening. Forget about the market froth, and take a taste of the latte underneath. CSCO, JDSU, QCOM, ORCL, NOK and many others are the latte, IMO. INTCfan