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: ratan lal who wrote (26900)	6/27/2000 1:30:00 PM
From: Mike Buckley	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 54805

ratan, I could be very wrong, but I don't see any less focus now than before. I do believe that many people tried to second-guess the next tornado, the next enabling gorilla a wee bit too soon, but I also believe they knew they were doing that at the time and were willing to accept the consequential risk of doing so. If there is a point of confusion, it is with Rambus. That's because from nowhere in left field came a patent for a product years old. If there is a lesson to be learned, it would be that to do our due diligence 100% we would have had to search all the patent applications and understand them. The reason you won't find me searching them is because there's not a chance that I'd understand them. So I leave that up to you to do and tell us about them. :) Seriously, my point is that the situation about Rambus's SDRAM patent wasn't due to a lack of focus. It was because there was a needle in a haystack and none of us were using the tiny pitchforks to find it. And now that we know about it, people are focusing on what the size of the markets are and the potential revenue streams. I label that process as having lots of focus. Just my opinion. --Mike Buckley

To: ratan lal who wrote (26900)	6/27/2000 1:51:00 PM
From: StockHawk	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 54805

>>Now with the meltdown of darlings like QCOM, GMST, CTXS etc and the take off of RMBS everyone seems to be confused.<< I have seen a number of boards where the stock followed has had a fall, and often they become almost unreadable, with harsh words and I told you so's. Considering that QCOM has fallen from 200 to 60, the focus on the fundamentals, and the largely unwavering belief in the company's gorilla status on this board has, to my mind, been incredible. Similar with GMST. We know we are early, we know we are taking a risk. I think that has been stated rather consistently. This board has always been about the relentless examination of the facts, and careful scrutiny of the gorilla/king attributes of the companies under discussion. What changed last fall was that just about everything was going up and therefore any shiny pebble brought to the stage got an ovation as its price rose. Besides, the stock market is a confusing place and making money is not easy. So someone hypothesizes that a stock like CTXS has great potential and is a worthy investment, even if it is not a gorilla or a king. Then the stock goes up and they are "proven" correct. It goes up more and more proof is in. Then it falls like a house of cards and everything is changed. Sure is confusing. Yesterday's good story is today's tragic ending. But rather than cause disarray, such events increase our focus, perhaps teaching us the risk in straying from the "rules". StockHawk

To: ratan lal who wrote (26900)	6/27/2000 2:24:00 PM
From: DownSouth	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 54805

ratan, with all due respect of your opinion, I have not seen any confusion here. QCOM is still a Gorilla--just a cheap one. We are following GMST--a potential Gorilla. CTXS was never declared a Gorilla. It was always a shiny pebble, though it had its fans. RMBS has been debated here since the beginning. The consensus was that it was a potential Gorilla, but had not crossed the chasm until recently. The IPR scenario for RMBS is particularly interesting and makes it a unique case. The leadership is here, ratan, and I think the focus is appropriate, too.