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: Joshua Corbin who wrote (35471)	11/27/2000 11:28:59 PM
From: Mike Buckley	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 54805

Joshua, Please make a case that Iomega and US Robotics were ever gorillas. I invested in both prior to publication of the manual. To the best of my understanding Robotics was a royalty play and Iomega was a gorilla wannabe that still hasn't became a gorilla. --Mike Buckley

To: Joshua Corbin who wrote (35471)	11/27/2000 11:45:10 PM
From: kumar	Respond to of 54805

would it surprise u to learn that other discontinuous innovations put your "list" out of the G/K designation ? cheers, kumar

To: Joshua Corbin who wrote (35471)	11/28/2000 12:21:07 AM
From: John Stichnoth	Respond to of 54805

Rule 4. Hold gorilla stocks for the long term. Sell only on proven substitution threat. Rule 6. Hold kings and princes lightly, selling . . . upon deceleration of hypergrowth. Your list appears to be full of royalty, not gorillas. Therefore Rule 6 would primarily apply. I don't know the specifics of most of the companies you list, but the companies mentioned of which I am aware would have provided very nice gains if GG practices had been applied. Witness WDC, during the mid 90's and the desktop hard drive explosion. Xerox and its dominance of the copier market in the 70's to 80's. Novell for networking software in the early 90's. Netscape until MSFT appeared as a threat. (Polaroid was never a gorilla given Kodak's dominance). Enough?