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: Apollo who wrote (35285)	11/26/2000 3:33:30 PM
From: Uncle Frank	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 54805

>> All I ask is that they be presented in a % format, and they don't need to be called LEAPS or anything else. Just the symbol and %. I'm interpreting that to mean that the dollars invested in LEAPS should be combined with the dollars invested in the underlying stock, and the total represented as a percentage of the portfolio. In other words, if my portfolio is $10,000, and I have $2,000 in qcom plus $500 in qcom LEAPS, I should show qcom as 25% of my holdings. uf

To: Apollo who wrote (35285)	11/26/2000 3:49:06 PM
From: Mike Buckley	Respond to of 54805

My portfolio: CSCO 4% EMC 12% GMST 8% QCOM 26% SEBL 44% SNDK 5% Not that it's part of the official survey, but for those interested I made one round-trip trade since the last survey -- selling Citrix and replacing it with Sandisk. (To be more precise, it's the only trade since dumping all non-Gorilla stocks in the first week of January.) The reason the percentages of ownership since the last survey have changed has nothing to do with my enthusiasm for or disappointment in a particular company's fundamentals; the change is due to stocks that rise and fall to widely varying degrees. As an example, Siebel has continued to rise faster than my other stocks, explaining why it currently occupies the largest portion of my portfolio. My Single Biggest Mistake Citrix. Big surprise, huh. Despite that I sold the stock at a significant profit after having held it for three years, the reason I didn't sell it earlier is a huge G&K mistake. It's so important that I learn from the mistake that I entered it into my personal investment diary. I felt and publicly wrote that the stock was very overvalued. I knew the enabling product had not entered the tornado. Those two factors made it an especially risky stock to hold and I didn't even think of it in that context. I'd like to think that if I had, I would have sold at a significantly higher price. Even if I had been fortunate to sell the stock at a higher price than the one I sold at, it was still a huge mistake not to see the huge red flag of an overvalued enabling stock that hadn't gone into the tornado phase. --Mike Buckley