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 : Amazon.com, Inc. (AMZN) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Robert Rose who wrote (118467)	2/24/2001 5:22:56 PM
From: re3	Respond to of 164684

i'm not sure what you expect wh to say or do here. his dismal record lately speaks for itself anyway, ho ho. besides, at one time i think you also told me to relax and get 'with the program' re the new economy.

To: Robert Rose who wrote (118467)	2/24/2001 7:00:03 PM
From: Glenn D. Rudolph	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 164684

Rob, I was going to stay out of this but I just can't keep my mouth shut<G> This post is not to defend Bill nor to villify Bill. It simply is a conclusion that I have come to and thought I would share. The market itself appears to become more of a trading vehicle compared to an investment vehicle that it more resembled in the early 90s and further back. The internet and lower commission rates has caused irrationality within the system that was always there to intensify. The internet has made it easier for firms to offer very low rates for trade commisions compared to the early 90s. This permits those that change their mind to buy or sell a stock without concerning themsleves with the cost of changing a position. In turn,m we have far greater trading volumes on all exchanges and far more volatility too. The sell side analyst in my opinion never really had the "Chinese Wall" between retaill accounts and underwriting divisions. This has always been an unlevel playing field but now it has gone close to bizerk. The quick dissemination of information due to the internet and the less experienced traders that listen to every analyst's comment has caused mind changing at very quick speeds and irrational trading behaviors. Whatever ethics there ever were within the sell side part of the brokerage firms, are now completely gone. Analaysts now make comments and calls with the specific intention of manipulating the price of a stock. Their intention to manipulate the price is for short term movements and the amount as a percentage a stock may be manipulated has increased 4x or more. It is clear that the stock market must now be approached as a casino only and possibly with good dicipline one can beat the casino for a short period of time. The part that concerns me is the equity markets are the source of assets for firms creating new products and this function is no longer being properly served. I do not believe it is fair to blame Bill or anyone else for this mess. I believe those that really should be held responsible are the brokerage pimps and their respective employees. That will not happen but we need real regulation and accountability for the actions of the brokerage firms and the analysts they employ. Analaysts should be fined huge sums of money when they make price target calls like that of QCOM of 1000 when they cannot provide an underlying funamental model for making such a call. I would go so far as to say fimes are inadequate and jail sentences should be imposed depending upon the extreme variation between the FA analysis and the call that was made. If this was enforced, I can guarantee we would never see some most of these rediculous calls. Some would argue we would have almost no analysts. That may be true and it would be better for our economy since the information is available to everyone now. I diverged a lot but I am trying to point out that it is likely Bill is getting hurt in his positions and I really doubt he is enjoying that. I got hurt both on the upside and the downside. There have been so many people on this thread that have come and then gone due to a total networth wipeout that it is sad. My case in point is Bill was posting about buys and some say not sells (I do not want to address that) when we were have a market going up in extremes. Bill's posting method, meaning his actions, have not changed to any degree during this large drop in valuations. Bill is still posting his thoughts. You have a right to be angry but I am not sure it should be with Bill. Mary meeker, "the internet queen", was making comments every day through Morgan Stanley doing press releases, on CNBC, etc. during the mania. Mary Meeker has been quite "meek" (pun intended) during this rapid market decent. Mary may not have a fiduciary duty to you if you do not have an account with Morgan Stanley but she really should have one to their clients. I could make a case she has one to everyone in the market because she and Morgan Stanley were aware her comments were being heard by non Morgan Stanley clients and they wanted it that way so she could manipulate the stocks. Many people are angry due to the losses. I can gurantee you the Mary meekers of the world, the bezos, the John Doers are all doing just great. Glenn