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 : Cisco Systems, Inc. (CSCO) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: bambs who wrote (40070)	9/24/2000 10:20:53 AM
From: Frank Griffin	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 77400

Bambs, suggestion; give your fellow posters credit for a level of good judgement and intelligence also. You speak as if you are the authority and everyone else is confused. That may prove so but we will not know until the course has been run. You have opinions and values. We must respect those but you should only share what you are doing so people can evaluate your values and determine if they are of value to them. It turns people off when you talk as if you have superior knowledge to your fellow posters. It may prove true or it may develop that your judgement is, in fact, inferior to the judgement of others. Only time will prove that out. In the meantime, it is good when everyone throws their judgement and values in to the pot for all to consider.

To: bambs who wrote (40070)	9/24/2000 1:47:42 PM
From: Stock Farmer	Respond to of 77400

bambs - It seems the thread has more difficulty with the style of your rhetoric than the substance of your message. This raises an interesting inference. I start with the hypothesis that posters to this thread are representative of those millions who are setting the price of CSCO through their buying and selling activity. Here you are, with an unpopular point of view, couched in an abrasive style, which may very well serve as a warning to others, or merely be so much hot air. Instead of constructive dialogue, you attract invective. Instead of questions with the intent to understand your point of view, you attract questions with the intent to discredit your style. And your unpopular "baseless assertions" are themselves attacked by baseless assertions (but more popular ones, so that makes it OK). I don't really have any empathy for you in this regard - we make our own way in this world. The implications for the market are my concern. In theory, the price of an equity represents a risk-weighted investment decision by millions of people. By hypothesis, this thread represents a cross-section of those millions setting the market prices of CSCO. If these millions are not receptive to downside risk, and more eagerly incorporate upside potential (upside risk) to their points of view... (as has been the practice on this thread) then they will be establishing a market price biased farther to the upside than it "should be" - all things considered. So that when something negative which "should have" been factored in comes to light, the stock will take a beating to the downside. When something positive comes to light, no big deal, already factored in. Hmmm. Yes, this is reasonably coincident with recent events. That means that there is more downside risk built into these prices than upside opportunity. Which, I think, has been your assertion all along. John.