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: Paul Senior who wrote (35505)	11/28/2000 3:47:18 AM
From: kumar	Respond to of 54805

i dont speak for mike. I believe the point is "learn to develop LTB&H" cheers, kumar PS: like u said : "ah forget it". It dont look like its a game for your mode of investing.

To: Paul Senior who wrote (35505)	11/28/2000 3:52:35 AM
From: Dr. Id	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 54805

Are you sort of saying reading 15,000 posts will improve someone's stock performance vs. the performance of someone who hasn't done the 15,000 reads but who also holds G&K stocks? You don't get it. In the time it takes to read all 15,000 posts, you'll be a LTB&H. Dr.Id@IpreferthebuffetattheMiragemyself.com

To: Paul Senior who wrote (35505)	11/28/2000 4:39:23 AM
From: Mike Buckley	Respond to of 54805

Paul, What's the point [of reading 15,000 posts] for ltb&h people who've already made their G&K buys? You partially answered your own question when you wrote, The relevance of book learning mostly comes after the mistakes are made. Being able to learn from the acknowledged mistakes in those 15,000 messages might prevent an investor from making their own mistake. But that's only one reason. I don't sense that you're truly open minded to other reasons so I won't bother explaining them to you. Are you sort of saying reading 15,000 posts will improve someone's stock performance vs. the performance of someone who hasn't done the 15,000 reads but who also holds G&K stocks? No. I said that reading them might be more worthwhile than reading any single investment book on the market. I stand by that opinion. It strikes me that someone who hasn't read them doesn't have an informed opinion about the worthwhileness of the task. --Mike Buckley

To: Paul Senior who wrote (35505)	11/28/2000 4:48:17 AM
From: Bruce Brown	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 54805

No need to give up Paul. Value investing is actually the center of gorilla and king investing. In terms of diversification, you will find my interest in that area quite openly discussed. I've had a wonderful year in stocks far removed from technology. Holdings like Cardinal Health, Safeway, Harley Davidson and Pfizer to name a few. 50 - 100% in each of them YTD. Yet, they each went through a 'resting phase' during the 1998/1999 time frame before this year. During that time frame, the technology portion lurched forward. I value the effect of long term compounding in an investment which time provides. I believe Buffett values that effect as well. This has turned many of my technology holdings into larger positions on a percentage basis simply due to their 'high growth' performance over the past 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9 years, etc... compounding the returns more than my non technology holdings. Past performance is no indicator of future performance, but I continue to feel that growth remains in certain areas going forward. Where I agree with you is that a portfolio balance can be a strategy for managing assets. We could easily compare notes on asset allocation strategies for age groups as well as risk/reward tolerance levels. Yet, there is not 'perfect' formula that fits or each individual. I firmly believe that the 'portion' of one's portfolio that is dedicated to technology investing should use the criteria we have learned in the series of Moore's books and have discussed on this thread. That doesn't mean one has to be 100% invested in technology only, but at least for the portion that is, the criteria spelled out in The Gorilla Game certainly helps one decide ways to invest their capital in the companies with technology that meet some fairly stringent criteria which might, over the long haul, play out to have been quite a 'value play'. That being said, mutual funds now have the highest cash position (6.5%) that they have had since the autumn of 1998. I'm sure they will be looking for value at some point. Mutual funds have held their highest cash positions exactly at or very near the market troughs in 1970, 1974, 1982, 1987, 1990, 1994, 1998 and it appears now may be setting up to qualify. We won't know about 'now' until we move on to the future and look back to see if it qualified. Yet, the funds have proven to be too much in 'cash' at each of the most opportune times for investors over the past 20 years. It's always an interesting indicator to watch. Of course, each of those periods in time (including now) had their own unique reason for being a market trough. And for that reason, I'm not trying to imply anything more than what the 'funds' have done. If you think through all of those time periods - be it Buffett or any investor who was simply holding through the period - it's easier to draw conclusions as to what kind of strategy may have been the best course of action. I assume we will be able to look back at 2000 three, four and five years down the road and draw some conclusions in aggregate about the second half of this year. BB