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.

Gold/Mining/Energy : Strictly: Drilling and oil-field services -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: upanddown who wrote (84161)	1/11/2001 1:46:05 PM
From: cnyndwllr	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 95453

John, RE: <<Since it is impossible to tell who is honest (and also competent) and who is a paid shill, why bother? >> I agree. Before the SEC rules on selective disclosure changed, I think it was important to ask these questions about the analysts because they had access to imformation far beyond our reach. Now that they are presumably in the same boat as the rest of us and have to do their own research, any benefits of their superior resources, experience and industry relationships are far outweighed by the fact that they are often invested in the very stocks they are providing evaluations for. Even our defender of the concept of relying on some anylysts, Isopatch, readily admits that they engage in "analyst speak" for the purpose of benefiting themselves and their paying customers at the expense of everyone else; a practice he apparently feels is acceptable. In my experience, it is interesting to hear their sector calls, not for the calls themselves but for the issues and facts they contain. With regard to individual stocks I think that a small investor with only a few stocks to track can do a good job of staying on top of those stocks. With regard to energy stocks, I think that most posters on this board have projected the path of individual stocks better than analysts. It seems that the analysts are usually behind the curve rather than ahead of it. Probably a better question would be how much the upgrades and downgrades they issue can move the stocks in today's environment. My general impression is that we are not getting the big moves we used to get based on changes in analysts ratings. In the past I made some money by swimming against the tide on stocks that were downgraded but I don't see those same opportunities lately. By the way Iso, this latest food fight might have identified those with not much to add, as you have suggested, but it has also identified some with superiority-inferiority issues as well. I don't follow this thread to find a guru who can lead me to the promised land (although JimP would be a great choice here), I follow this thread to have the benefit of the thinking of all of the posters. Any discussion that evaluates past posters contributions and demeans them discourages that discussion and lessens the thread. I think we can assume that investors should be able to distinguish between drivel and gems of wisdom, and discourage neither. If those readers here who invest cannot make that distinction, they will not be investors for long. This cuts both ways and I think we may have gone too far in poking fun at Slider for shouting his sometimes offbeat views, no matter how tempting it was when he trumpeted his own horn. I personally enjoy and benefit from the posting of you, JQP, Slider, and all of the others. The food fights are fun but not to the point where everyone gets shy about posting any point of view because he or she may have to eat it later. Ed