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: DlphcOracl who wrote (28570)	7/23/2000 8:08:30 AM
From: DlphcOracl	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 54805

On the other hand, for all the Q-heads on this thread... This article is worth a quick read: worth.com

To: DlphcOracl who wrote (28570)	7/23/2000 10:53:39 AM
From: StockHawk	Respond to of 54805

>>For the record, QCOM would NOT be one of my short candidates<< I realize there is a very big difference between stating that something might not be the best performer, and calling it a short candidate. And I did not mean to imply that you were advocating a short position. It just makes it very easy to see at an instance which is performing better. If, for example, QCOM doubles but the others triple, the portfolio will show a positive value (and if Q triples while the others double it will go negative). Also, since the portfolio starts with a value of zero, with an equal dollar amount of longs and shorts it can be said to be 'market neutral'. Therefore whether the market crashes or rockets it should not have an effect, only the relative performance matters. I could have just as easily set it up with a long Q position and short the others. The results would track the same way. And since many of us here own QCOM as well as probably one or two of the others you selected, the best case will be for all the stocks to become ten-baggers, which would keep the value of this just-for-fun portfolio right at zero! StockHawk