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: Uncle Frank who wrote (34555)	11/10/2000 11:18:01 PM
From: Mike Buckley	Respond to of 54805

Begging the indulgence of the non-golfers Mere begging isn't sufficient. At a minimum, grovelling is also required. --Mike Buckley

To: Uncle Frank who wrote (34555)	11/10/2000 11:49:08 PM
From: Mike Buckley	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 54805

Frank, I was with you all the way down the fairway until you got to the following: It is clear that while many made money investing in Qualcomm in 1999, a large percentage gave it back in 2000. I contend that one does not "invest" in a period of one year. The short time-frame is only for speculators, not investors. Investors endure the ups and downs of a long-term investment whereas successful speculators might occasionally ride a stock up and adroitly sell it before the paper gains have evaporated. Moreover, had anyone invested in Q at the absolute highest price of 1999 which occurred only during the very last week of the year, the current paper losses would be about 60%. Whereas that may seem like a lot to some people, the nature of typically volatile high-tech stocks is such that a 60% loss during an initial 11-month period is not particularly unusual. It's not fun but it's also not to be a surprise. Adding to the statistics, if anyone had invested at the worst possible time during the other 51 weeks of the year, the current paper loss would be about 45%. Many of us wrote in the thread that Cisco tanked 40% three times and that this is to be expected of any high-tech stock. Moreover, had anyone invested in Q at virtually any time during the first ten months of 1999, the smallest paper profit would be 25% and that would be in a period of 11 months. The maximum paper profit one could have gained by investing in the best time of 1999 (the first week) would be a massive 878%. --Mike Buckley

To: Uncle Frank who wrote (34555)	11/11/2000 6:23:02 AM
From: BirdDog	Respond to of 54805

That is a wonderfull parable. ... the sad part is that they could have closed out the game by simply using their putter. May I humbly expand on this in a way that most probably should have, and perhaps didn't? We can compare our investing lives to a golf tournament. In the tournament there are four rounds to completion. In our investing careers we should treat each round of golf as a year of investing. (although we have more than four rounds) On the humurous side of the game. ...mastered - ball striking and course management... There are some of us who are constantly aiming for the cart path in hopes of getting that extra 200 yards of roll afforded by it. (Hint hint to traders and options players) BirdDog

To: Uncle Frank who wrote (34555)	11/11/2000 6:43:06 AM
From: Bruce Brown	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 54805

I'd like to offer some observations about Tiger Woods that might help to support that claim. Unfair, UF. Totally - unfair! If you are going to use an example, at least choose one that is human. Woods is a GOD. If you don't believe me, go outside tonight when the stars are out and shining. Locate the big dipper. Look up to the left about 10 degrees and there he is. Tiger Woods pumping his fist after sinking another 42 foot putt to get the winner's check. Nike swoosh and all... Now let's talk about we 'duffers' trying to shoot under 90. We've been on a golf course for the past 12 months that makes Pebble Beach on a 60 mph windy day seem like a piece of cake. We've taken more than our share of Mulligans, penalty shots, sand in the eyes out of the trap, sunburn, aches and pains in the back from toting the bag and trying to stand up in the wind, etc... . Good thing we like golf because we'll keep playing. It may take some time to shoot a better round, but we'll be back. Your illustration was excellent. I applaud it (as I do Tiger). Looking back in retrospect it's clear to see everything now. That doesn't count though. We can't have that shot on the 6th hole over again. Forget about that putt we left an inch to the left on the 11th. The round we just played is finished. Gone. Over. Yet, we must remember it was simply one round. How was your handicap a year ago, two years ago, three years ago. Where will it be one year, two years, three years from now. I would imagine our portfolios stand up better in that scenario than our handicaps do. <ggg> We've all been through the unpleasant process this year as well as in previous years. Whether it was 98, 97, 93-95, 89-91, 87, 1980-81, etc... . Who could have predicted the results of Tuesday's election? Nobody. There are no odds or bookmakers that would have chanced it. It's a real pressure that may just serve (along with the economic backdrop) as the catalyst which puts us into the final unpleasant capitulation scenario next week that has happened time and time again over the years. No matter how skilled one is with their course management and their swing - this part of the game is one that cannot be avoided. We don't have the choice of 'not taking the shot'. We're on the course with our sticks. Our backs our tired. Our shot making is challenged. Our score is high. We've got to play in to the clubhouse. The shot required is a blind shot that must carry 179 yards over water, draw left around some trees and faces a stiff wind with no choice but to use one of the most difficult clubs in our bag. Tough shot? Yes. Yet - it is one shot in one game at one course. Where's Tiger when you need him? We've now corrected for 8 months with the 50 year history of bear market corrections being 8.2 - 9.x months followed by an average of 3.75 years of upswing markets. (Not exact numbers, but pretty close.) Is everything 'different' this time? Too bad we cannot fast forward to a year or two from now and see. We cannot. Just as we cannot go back 12 months prior. However, the continued research of our companies will lead us to those best poised to play our best golf and remain in our bag. Each course is different and presents opportunity to use our course management and ball striking ability with the clubs in our bag. BB