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 : Siebel Systems (SEBL) - strong buy? -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Mike Buckley who wrote (4181)	12/19/2000 5:25:23 PM
From: Ibexx	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 6974

Got back in just before the close. Anyone who is interested in comparing investment results in SEBL, LT v. ST, can drop me a note next year this time, but not next week nor next month. Ibexx PS: The stock may drift lower yet in the days to come, but I can live with $63 as an entry point.

To: Mike Buckley who wrote (4181)	12/19/2000 6:19:37 PM
From: Trader Dave	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 6974

Mike, I sincerely applaud your thoughtful commentary on LTB&H. If you were to truly appreciate how superior your understanding of the investing process (and of SEBL) is compared to at least 97% of the wall street "professional" community you would go home, have a good cry at the tragic lack of discipline that permeates the "professional" investment world and wrap up with a hearty laugh when you realize that your approach will pave the way towards long term world class returns on par with the greatest investors of all time. When I tell people that history points ONLY to LTB&H investors as the greatest of all time, I usually get a laugh. Then I ask "Is there a trader, market timer, fast money hedge fund manager that has delivered results of a Buffet, Templeton or Lynch?" No. Market timing is pure sophistry. The problem is that there are enough practitioners (and enough benefit to the BROKERAGE community to perpetuate the myths of market timing) that there will always be a market timing hero of the day that gets a few in a row right. But not over an investing lifetime. If fast money mutual funds and day traders got a good look at their long term after tax returns (or if mutual funds were forced to report after tax results) there might be a lot more appreciation of long term thinking. Once again, a fine post. TD

To: Mike Buckley who wrote (4181)	12/20/2000 5:54:34 AM
From: Allegoria	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 6974

OT: Thanks for the 10K info about SEBL currency hedging strategies, Mr. Buckley. You'd rather invest in a company whose market is limited to dollar-denominated sales? I prefer the mass markets the entire world has to offer. Excuse me, did I say I preferred 'dollar-denominated sales'? I only acknowledged a potential risk Mike. Moreover, any reasonable study of the after-tax benefits of holding stocks for very long periods does prove that the short-term buyer/seller has to far outperform the long-term buyer/seller on a pre-tax basis to achieve the same after-tax results. That's an inescapable function of the results of compounded, retained earnings. Well maybe my study would be unreasonable and insufficient for a great mind like yours <ggg> and I acknowledge your points concerning compounded, retained earnings. You are probably aware that wrt the study of LTB&H benefits, as the time period is reduced the realized benefits are also reduced. Looking at LTB&H from a more critical perspective:. Working from the likelihood that a LTB&H investor will at some point reevaluate his investment and sell (even 40 years later); he may incur tax if his investment is still profitable. We know that in this time his tax bill was in some sense reduced by inflation but remember, so is his investment return. I submit that it is not unreasonable to assume that the LTB&H investment return will be further reduced since these returns will incur a higher tax rate than had they been sold earlier, because taxes normally go up during a 30-40 year time period. Practicality counts. I am honestly curious - it sounds great to talk about "very long periods" but has anyone actually held a stock for "very long periods"? May I ask the thread: who has held a security for a 'very long period of time? Has anyone held a stock continuously for the last 20 years? 30 years? 40 years? What stock? I am honestly curious because I doubt anyone has. If you profess to be so good at achieving those pre-tax results, more power to you. I'm genuinely thrilled for you! I'm not that good. I contend that very, very few people are. Now Mike…why do you respond with this "if you are so good" nonsense? I never said I was good. Why you write this? I related to something about the volatility of SEBL, LTB&H and the lot but nothing professing what a great investor I think I am. Is it an attempt to belittle? Actually, you're wrong. I agree with you that LTB&H isn't for everyone. Neither is eating properly. Nor is exercising. Some people are in great health, living long and happy lives smoking a pack of cigarettes a day. That doesn't mean it's good for everyone to live that sort of life because, clearly, that's very bad for some people. Similarly, noting that a stock such as Siebel has fallen 50%, increased 40% and fallen 30% in only five weeks doesn't prove that short-term investing is more desirable or that long-term investing is less desirable. So basing investment decisions on macro trends in the economy to you is akin to "not eating properly, not exercising, smoking a pack of cigarettes a day". Got it. And if you perceive another WWII breaking out, you will ignore it and BUY (not hold, but buy) a stock you feel is a good investment regardless. Sorry I don't believe it. You are correct that the volatility in SEBL doesn't prove ST over LT nor LT over ST. So why do you say LT is superior to ST? For every analysis you bring forward, by reducing the time period I can show ST was superior. I'm not sure what your point is. Using those as examples of macro trends, be reminded that those are relatively short periods of time compared with periods of time associated with LTB&H. Thus, those trends are irrelevant to really long-term investors. That's why we ignore them. My point is simple. You make investment decisions on what stocks to buy in what sectors and what technology (which is extraordinarily difficult in itself!) based on some method of DD. Why would you not apply this same level of DD on macro economic trends in an attempt to increase profits. No one gets their stock picks right all the time, why should you expect your DD on the economic trends to be any more successful? But that doesn't mean you stop trying. DD on stock picks is hopefully better than a monkey picking your stocks, why allow the monkey strategy to choose when you invest? I guess if you really see general long term economic macro trends as irrelevant to 'really long term investors' then I understand why you ignore them. I do not. And no Mike, that does not mean I am some sort of Super Investor. Why do you care how others spend their time? If after following my posts on the G&K thread, here, or anywhere, you think I'm "blindly" investing, I don't have a problem with that. I could ask you that same question. Why do you always tout the benefits of LT over ST on the threads you post? Remember I am responding to your posts, not the other way around. To ask someone "What do you care..." isn't in very good spirit is it Mike? Why go to this level with me then? Good luck, Eric