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 : JDS Uniphase (JDSU) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: sea_biscuit who wrote (10533)	5/25/2000 5:34:00 PM
From: SouthFloridaGuy	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 24042

Dipy, I have been a noted bear and contrarian on Silicon Investor for a while now, but even I cannot agree with your assessment. Briefly, my thesis was that Oct - Jan was caused by an influx of liquidity due to lax Fed policy prior to Y2k and that Jan - March was a short squeeze with many hedge funds thinking belated tax selling would kill the markets and bonus money flowing in. If the Fed hikes 50 basis points more we hit 2900 and begin a slow and arduous rally which takes us to 3500 by Q1 2000. If the Fed hikes a 100 basis points, we go to 2600 MAXIMUM, and 3300 Q1 2001. By that time the economy will have slowed to a creep. Monetary policy is more powerful during times of low fiscal debt - and these are the times we are in. This was evident when the Fed increased liquidity prior to Y2k hence causing our above normal growth. It will also be evident in the reverse, after the interest rate hikes take affect and liquidity is siphoned off. The Great Depression was caused by worldwide economic mismanagement, not by the stock market crash. Never before has the world been so efficient and open with its markets. Instead of looking at PE's I think you should focus on PEG's and future PEG's. Surely Disney's 70x PE was unjustified because it wasn't even growing at 20%. Today's tech companies are much more dynamic then yesterday's goliaths. Another thing. Many companies on the NYSE are still quite undervalued, so much of this Nasdaq money will flow into retailers, transports, and other beaten down sectors. All in all, it's a great period of expansion for the world. I fully believe we are no better or worse off than we were prior to October 1999, when this amazing expansion of multiples took place. Thus, we should simply go back to the levels we were at prior to October: 2600-2900 and we should resume a normal pattern of growth for technology stocks - 30% /year. JMHO of course!

To: sea_biscuit who wrote (10533)	5/25/2000 7:43:00 PM
From: TOM E WALTERS	Respond to of 24042

i remember 1973...land had increased 10-15% in atlanta every year since 1945. in 1973, all came to a screeching halt; and values went back to 1950 levels. in the collapse, no man or group or bank could do a thing to turn the tide...quite a lesson for me.

To: sea_biscuit who wrote (10533)	5/27/2000 3:47:00 PM
From: Tunica Albuginea	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 24042

OTOT/Dipy: I am afraid you are wrong on Disney, ( and Robert Wade was right ): Equally sanguine is Robert Wade, director of research for the Wall Street firm of Burnham & Co., who says that the Walt Disney Co. remains a good value even though it's priced at 70 times earnings. "Disney typifies what a growth stock should be," says Wade. "It has a unique image and franchise. It makes people happy." It's December 1972. The Dow Jones industrial average hovers at a lofty 1000.............. ...............And you stand on the precipice of one of this century's worst bear markets, second only to the tumble that kicked off the Great Depression....... Had one bought DIS in 1972 at the start of the depression this is what would have happened: moneycentral.msn.com Looking back, DIS,in 1792, at 70X earnings was actually VERY CHEAP, cheers :-) TA Message #10533 from Dipy at May 25, 2000 5:09 PM ET Most bull market tops begin while corporate profits are still rising. Many tops are accompanied by only wiffs of future inflation after periods of extended business expansion. In fact, these conditions are part of the reason why it is so hard for people to see the top as a "top." 'With everybody working and corporate profits at record levels year after year, how could this possibly lead to a bear market?' That's just it. It can. Ironic, eh? Precisely. The following article excerpt from Kiplinger narrates the state of the affairs in December 1972, just on the threshold of the nasty 73-74 bear. Things were going great when the bear market started. It has to be remembered that bear markets always begin in times of extreme optimism, and bull markets begin in times of extreme pessimism. The stock market should go higher still because "prosperity is almost certain to continue," reports Business Week. Fortune says it's "hard to imagine a combination of circumstances that would entirely undo the good work of the past few years, which halved the inflation rate from roughly 6% three years ago to about 3% now." Equally sanguine is Robert Wade, director of research for the Wall Street firm of Burnham & Co., who says that the Walt Disney Co. remains a good value even though it's priced at 70 times earnings. "Disney typifies what a growth stock should be," says Wade. "It has a unique image and franchise. It makes people happy." It's December 1972. The Dow Jones industrial average hovers at a lofty 1000. H. Ross Perot is a big player on Wall Street. Super Bowl tickets go for $15. And you stand on the precipice of one of this century's worst bear markets, second only to the tumble that kicked off the Great Depression...