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 : Amazon.com, Inc. (AMZN) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Bill Harmond who wrote (110922)	10/22/2000 10:44:55 PM
From: GST	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 164684

William: "GST is LIKELY wrong about an oil embargo..." I think you are dead wrong on this. The world we live in reflects a central feature -- the calculation of probabilities. I would never say there is a 100% probability of an "oil embargo". What I do say and have said is that there is an "increased risk" in other words an increased probability of supply problems. And there is nothing to suggest an outright embargo in order is the only possible disruption. Whatever probability you put on a supply disruption of whatever magnitude, only a fool IMO would not recognize that the probability increases if the peace process dies. You deny that the peace process is even in trouble. Everybody else seems to think it is in big trouble. The risks took a turn for the worse when the peace process "died". That is a fact. This has already happened. I am not making a statement about the future -- I am making a statement about the situation that exists right here and now.

To: Bill Harmond who wrote (110922)	10/22/2000 11:07:11 PM
From: Eric Wells	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 164684

Most of that is mental masterbation. First of all, William, I'm both shocked and amazed, and a bit grateful, to be the recipient of such a lengthy post from you. This must be an SI record for you, no? As for an oil embargo - you may be correct that an OPEC sanctioned embargo is unlikely. However, the possibility of Sadam deciding to independently turn off or reduce Iraqi oil flow is not out of the question (I believe he has already threatened to do so - but over the issue of receiving payment in Euros instead of dollars). Even additional threats from Sadam would be enough, in my view, to send oil prices back up toward $40. While you say the Israelis have lowered their guard to recognize the rights of their neighbors - I would say that most Palestinians would probably disagree with you - or at least, that is the impression that one is left with when watching stone throwers on television. What we do know about the situation in the Middle East at the moment is that it's worse than it's been in years - and it doesn't seem to be getting any better. And if the situation continues to get worse, the likelihood that oil prices will rise, even if just out of fear, is much greater than the likelihood that they will fall. Thanks for your post. By the way - my challenge to you to write something objectively critical about one of your equity holdings still stands (you might want to try AMZN - it should be easy). -Eric