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: John Malloy who wrote (43349)	11/11/2000 11:11:07 AM
From: Eric	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 77400

John Good observation. I have wondered about this also but think the way you put it is very logical.

To: John Malloy who wrote (43349)	11/11/2000 11:17:17 AM
From: RetiredNow	Respond to of 77400

careful, John. You are starting to sound rational, and God knows this thread doesn't react well to reasonable posts. :)

To: John Malloy who wrote (43349)	11/11/2000 11:20:49 AM
From: Tom D	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 77400

What is the formula for the relationship? One would infer that there is a mathematical relationship between the NASDAQ and the two independent variables (GDP and Bond rate). Could you please post the formula? Thanks, Tom D P.S. Is there a way you can adjust the formula so that when one uses it, there is a personal insult directed at CSCO bulls or bears (as appropriate)? Otherwise, how are we going to be able to get the satisfaction that accompanies our bitter ad hominem attacks?

To: John Malloy who wrote (43349)	11/11/2000 11:59:38 AM
From: bambs	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 77400

Why don't you take a look at the historical relationship between the market cap of the dow and nasdaq against the GDP. You will see that we are currently still at nose bleed valuations as far as market caps are concerned. How about looking at the growth in operating earnings over the last 10 years compared to the growth in stock prices. Again you will find that this market doesn't make any sense. Gains from investments and easy credit has fueled this market it the point we are at now. The credit bubble is bursting and the stock market bubble with it. Bambs

To: John Malloy who wrote (43349)	11/11/2000 1:18:20 PM
From: Monty Lenard	Respond to of 77400

"Early this year the NASDAQ reached 5.5 standard deviations higher than the expected value - a solid indication that the market was overvalued. Yesterday the NASDAQ closed 2.3 standard deviations below the expected value. That means we are near the bottom." How bout indulging a dumb old country boy here and answer me a question. If the naz can go 5.5 sd higher than the expected value then why can't it go 5.5 sd below? Monty

To: John Malloy who wrote (43349)	11/11/2000 1:34:36 PM
From: Monty Lenard	Respond to of 77400

John, please explain how your analysis now is better than it was here: Message 12533547 Not trying to pick a fight with you but by the same token there are people reading this kind of stuff that just may believe you and buy into this bubble. Monty