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 : Qualcomm Incorporated (QCOM) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Teresa Lo who wrote (82723)	10/8/2000 8:22:15 PM
From: Robert Rose	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 152472

<What is the trigger to pick up the phone or to click the mouse? > Sometimes momo, sometimes lack thereof. It is so complex. And I am not trying to cop out here. For example, during the new econ bubble (early 98-early 00) I was ST trading based largely on momo as long as I believed fundamentals supported the underpinnings (a little laughable in hindsight, I know... <g>). (And needless to say, I made a bundle on qcom. :)) Finally, after quite a rude awakening ;), I changed my investment strategy in 5/00 to longer term investment and only 50%, not 100% investment in new econ stocks. (Duh!). Re cent events were suggesting that while the fundamental changes in our economy still warranted a (very) bullish attitude toward new econ equities LT, simple technicals such as 50 and 200 ma's did not. So it is not that I am unaware of technical trends in the market by any means, but just that I don't pretend to have or even want to develop the expertise to time them so precisely. A portfolio that can account for the vagaries of this crazy market, yet still plan for the returns of this unfolding new economy, while still trying to minimize high-bracket tax ramifications in such a high income tax state (read: I want some LT capital gains <g>) are what I am currently striving for. (Sorry about the imprecision. But it's somehow managed to work pretty well so far. :)) ps. You sound like a good trader. It's a very hard thing to do. Rob

To: Teresa Lo who wrote (82723)	10/8/2000 9:20:35 PM
From: waverider	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 152472

Teresa, I'll answer your question. I'd had a token position in QCOM since late 1996 because I was impressed with the technology and the company's management. I traded some of it for fun based on what I thought were fairly clear Bollinger Band patterns. Then in late Feburary '99 I put everything I had on the company for two reasons: 1. I had lost my posterior in the oil sector and a sincere cause of fraud in a tech stock I owned (you folks may not believe it, but I was one of the lead plaintiffs in the class action suit against the company and we have won a considerable sum...even with the lawyer fees taken out). I knew so much about QCOM I figured if it didn't pan out, I was not cut out to be an investor (if it didn't pan out I had decided to close my brokerage account within 6 months and let mutual funds do the job). 2. Despite my bashing of chart readers in the past, it was real clear to me in late Febuary '99 that something was going on with the Q chart. I bought stock and LEAPs when the stock was in the 70's with the money that remained from my previous blunders. It is clear now what was casuing the chart to show signs of accumulation...the ERICY deal. So to make the story a bit more simple, I bought the majority of my Q position based on what the chart was doing...a break out in my opinion. It worked. FWIW, I agree with many here...you included...that we are in a breakout pattern now as well. Interestingly enough, we are at the same stock price as we were when I bought for the same reason back in 99...forgetting the splits. Rick

To: Teresa Lo who wrote (82723)	10/8/2000 9:34:24 PM
From: Win-Lose-Draw	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 152472

What is the trigger to pick up the phone or to click the mouse? Apart from the obvious (company makes money and biggest growth is ahead of it, not behind it) it's a matter of perception. It seemed to me the company was not only a good bet on the financials, but it had the je ne sais quoi that allows a buzz to surround it like a halo. Basically, in addition to making money, it's at the confluence of every bad acronym in our modern world. But none of that would have mattered if it happend been beaten to a pulp from it's ~$200 highs of last year.

To: Teresa Lo who wrote (82723)	10/9/2000 6:12:46 AM
From: Maurice Winn	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 152472

Well, since you ask, I figure it all out over years, based on a lifetime's experience of how the world works. Then I wait. I wait until the price is at what seems to me like a fearful low [which always seems to happen]. For example, I waited from 1991 to 1994 before finally buying my first lot of Q! stock. Then waited until a 25% drop from $40 to $32 overnight to buy the next lot. Similarly, I waited after the G! IPO until the price seemed as low as it could go [$3 split-adjusted]. Then, this year, waited for all the excitement to fizzle out before buying at $15 only to find there was a LOT more fizzling out to go. Currently half that. So, yes, price is the trigger for me, despite claiming to be a fundamental fundamentalist who scoffs at TA - I guess that makes me a hypocrite as well as a fundamentalist technical analyst. It's interesting to think about exactly why one does pick up the phone and place the order. Finding the company is a long process to do with values, interests, understanding, and the things which made me lock onto Q! go back to my infancy mid 20th century and engineering school in the 1970s and business experiences and world travel and thinking about demographics and thousands of little ideas which made Q! compelling. FWIW, Mqurice

To: Teresa Lo who wrote (82723)	10/9/2000 6:14:05 PM
From: DanD	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 152472

How about -- I have some money now. Where do I invest it? Most fundamental investment advice that I have seen recommends dollar or value cost averaging. That makes time and available cash the only triggers. Peter Lynch claims he never consulted TA. He also was not a trader, and said most of his best stocks paid of 2-3 years in the future. Dan D PS Also fundamental techniques like PE and PEG and other fundamental based analysis techniques have a timing element to them.