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 : WDC/Sandisk Corporation -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: slacker711 who wrote (17678)	12/27/2000 1:24:49 AM
From: herringbone_100	Respond to of 60323

<Simply put...they were blinded by greed> i cannot completely disagree with your statement; many were blinded by greed. but many investors- not traders attempting to time the market- were blinded by 'hope' as well. there is a difference. i don't have much sympathy for any ipo, dot-com, 'players,' presumably they were aware they were gambling ... but i sure do feel for those who purchased shares in legit tech companies like emc, emlx, etc. trusting the ANALysts target prices and new economy blather and then found they were essentially sheep led to the distribution slaughter-house. i don't think many of these investors felt they were gambling?! more, investing in the bright economic future of the u.s., guarded over by the benign and brilliant Mr. Greenspan. a lack of foresight and information, yes- but an overall willful and blinding greed, turning a deaf ear to repeated and clearly pronounced warnings by the fed? no, not imo. begone day-traders and speculators, hey i won't shed any tears for them- it is their job to be aware of the risks, but the average american investor is guilty of no more than ignorance- and will pay a steep price for it. will the banks pay the same steep price for their badly made loans, and imprudent investments? they tend to get bailed out, no? perhaps this is for the best as you pointed out, no one wants a run on banks.... my point is that while yes, i agree that greed was/is rampant in this bubble, greed is ceraintly not limited to the individual investor but embraces the banks/mfunds/hedges.... yet the individual investor will disproportionatly pay the price- whether in losses or in distributed taxes.

To: slacker711 who wrote (17678)	12/27/2000 12:52:53 PM
From: 5dave22	Respond to of 60323

<It is this type of situation which Greenspan wanted to avoid.> Well said. In the last five years NAZ has gone from 1000 to 2500 (250% growth over 5 years). At that rate it would be 6250 in 2005 and 15,625 in 2010. We would all retire early. Many people are upset that NAZ is below 5000. If it were 5000 today, with the same parameters above we would be looking at a NAZ of 25,000 in 2005 125,000 in 2010 (500% growth over 5 years). IMO most of the people calling Greenspan 'evil' are a little upset that they didn't make millions off of the dotcoms. I didn't make millions either, but if the NAZ carries it's CURRENT growth line, I will retire very well in about 10 years. Regards, Dave