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 : JDS Uniphase (JDSU) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: zbyslaw owczarczyk who wrote (16377)	1/10/2001 6:45:02 PM
From: pat mudge	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 24042

Strategy for stock investing through July 2002: "Buy stocks into every dip until the Fed stops easing. The rebound will pick up speed when other central banks around the world start easing as well. But when the Fed stops easing, flip back to the other side and return to currencies, commodities and bonds. ... Why buy now? ... I believe the stock market has already adjusted to the weakness expected for the next six months, and possibly the year. ... Furthermore, we are at levels where the world's smartest investors buy. At the end of the day, the most important thing for the average investor to know is how long to hold a security. I believe it is five years. I think the guy's right. At least about buying on dips through the rate-cut process. Pat

To: zbyslaw owczarczyk who wrote (16377)	1/10/2001 9:18:12 PM
From: Stocker	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 24042

his story below proofs that Cramer and his stuff have connection to hedge founds. interview with hedge found manager ( unknown for us only ). So Cramers comes at right time and is spelling hedges wishes when it is convenient. For example : " Cramers hates optics" after his friends told his that it is time to cover GLW or JDSU........... Ummm, what the heck are you talking about ZO???? The story at this link thestreet.com has nothing to do with Cramer. He didn't write it and he's not even mentioned in it. The story didn't even originate on thestreet.com, it came from MSN. You don't have a leg to stand on making the claims you make. Several writers on thestreet.com including Cramer said they didn't like optics stocks AT LEAST 2 months ago and anybody who sat down and objectively listened to their reasoning about the issue saved a TON of money. Cramer was even advising readers to get off margin and take some profits in high flyers into the runup this summer. He's been consistant in his writings on this sector and can hardly be accused of catering to funds that are short. He's recently been saying that he would NOT short these stocks as that too is dangerous given the likelihood of more fed cuts and oversold bounces. He doesn't run his own hedge fund anymore either. What could he possibly have to gain helping his so called hedge fund "friends" when his paycheck is now derived from thestreet.com. It's naive to think he would tell his readers one thing while doing/thinking the opposite. You just don't like the message, but he was dead right, you've been so wrong. Pull your head out of the sand man.

To: zbyslaw owczarczyk who wrote (16377)	1/10/2001 9:53:18 PM
From: Stocker	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 24042

ZO, isn't this convenient. Maybe, just maybe he wrote this in response to your BS. Read it once, read it twice, then read it again. Maybe you'll get it. A Fake Tech Rally By James J. Cramer 1/10/01 4:43 PM ET You want to be more constructive about tech. You want to say, "These stocks are down so low that I think they must be done going down." And, most important, you want to believe that the "action" is positive and therefore begets better action. I know the first thought -- that they are so low that they are done going down -- has some credence. John Roque put together a terrific piece about the Nazz that I thought echoed this thinking perfectly. There are signs of improvement on the macro front. Last week, the junk market opened up after the Fed's action. That kind of money does end up with the Ciscos (CSCO:Nasdaq - news - boards) and the Lucents (LU:NYSE - news - boards) and the Nortels (NT:NYSE - news - boards). We know it is bullish; we just don't know how bullish for tech (on the other hand, we do know how bullish it is for financials and retail). And I think that some of tech has fought to bottom. The semiconductors "act better." For what that's worth. (It is worth quite a lot for a day or two, but then not much at all.) I also respect the notion that if you own no tech, you have to start buying. Remember, though, I am a big believer that NDX 1500 isn't going to occur and I think that we are groping for a bottom in the Nazz at the 2000 to 2100 level. However, I think the ramp we got in Wednesday's trading was illusory. I know the way the game works all too well. Much of the buying today is pure short-covering. Let me explain how it works: Many funds like to make giant bets for or against the Nasdaq. They buy puts on the Nasdaq or the MNX (that's the Nasdaq "mini-index"), and they then wait for the selling to begin. When Cisco's Chambers didn't put a rosy scenario on tap, these short-sellers figured, oh boy, let's press our bets. There was a giant wave of put-buying when Chambers guided people down. Then, well, then, nothing happened. Oh sure, lots of sellers of Cisco came into the market. Seems like a sizable chunk of the company traded and is being placed into hands that don't seem so panicky. But the rest of the market didn't collapse. Now, picture the short-term nature of these put buyers. They can't have a rally on their hands. They need supply to develop. They need large sellers to materialize, and materialize almost immediately on Cisco's "bad" news. It didn't occur. So, the short-sellers then sell their puts or they go in and buy common stocks of their faves against the puts. Next thing you know you have a rally. Why don't I think the rally is "real?" Because I think if hedge funds hadn't gotten short ahead of today's action, we wouldn't have had a rally. We would have had nothing. Remember the mantra: For tech I want two things: for supply to be in balance with demand in the stock market, and for business starting to look better at the companies. Today we saw the former: a short-term glitch in the market in which there were more buyers than sellers because so many people bet against the market, hoping for a quick decline to profit from. That's the short-squeeze you saw into the bell. However, the latter thing is not happening. In fact, we know from Cisco today that things got worse, not better, of late. We need both demand and better fundies to sustain a rally. For those of you looking for a silver lining, I offer the same one I always do: When the Fed cuts, you can't stay short. I think these shorts will continually have to cover as the Nazz doesn't break down. But tech doesn't rally big when the Fed first starts easing. And the recession, if there is one, is just hitting tech with a vengeance. That's why I like these other groups that I keep talking about more than tech. A smart reader out of Chicago I correspond with told me he is telling people who are long-termers, "Look, take some tech, like Cisco, off the table into these rallies. You will probably get a chance to buy it lower." I can't disagree. There are too many nonbattlegrounds out there -- witness the incredibly strong and predictable action in the brokers and the banks -- that I don't want to be caught in the cross-fire of the NDX, even if I think the downside is getting more and more limited with each expected Fed cut. Random musings: Enjoyed signing the new TheStreet.com book at Barnes & Noble today. Hope to see you next week at Borders in downtown Manhattan (5 World Trade Center, at the corner of Church and Vesey streets). If you can't wait until then to read it, don't!