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.

Politics : Ask Michael Burke -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Skeeter Bug who wrote (86063)	11/30/2000 1:23:19 PM
From: benwood	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 132070

Skeets, that is an excellent point about 1 share at 1000 and 2 at 4500. It's a very common phenomenon for the demand of a stock to increase dramatically when it has doubled or quadrupled in short order, and that is pretty much the case of the NAZ stocks of the last two years. I would think that the reason there isn't any more bounce is that many people are now completely out of the market, or worse, paying debt they've taken on due to margin losses. This demand increasing as the prices skyrocket is partly due to the machine that is Wall Street -- mouthpieces yapping breathlessly on bubblevision about these huge gains and how the sky's the limit. Remember the 2-5% per day increases? Only the delusional, and there were many, thought it was a new reality of investing. I thought the market bubble was getting ready to burst when I was hearing about stock tips from my wife (from her pharmacist coworkers). My wife is the last person I'd expect to hear about stocks from... The last tip was for a stock at 60 that now sits at 5 1/4. When I looked into it, I could hardly believe how vacuous the company was, and yet it still doubled from there before crashing (XLA). I told my wife it was worth $3 per share. People at the time would have thought me insane.