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.

Politics : High Tolerance Plasticity -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: cnyndwllr who wrote (689)	3/1/2001 12:43:45 PM
From: Think4Yourself	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 23153

I know what you mean regarding ORCL. was thinking the same thing myself. Put in a limit order to sell my MSFT this morning because the PE is pretty rich in the declining environment. Set the limit at the bid and got a bunch of small (100-500 share) fills as soon as it hit, but it didn't all go. Looked at the stock price and it had dropped an additional point in less than a minute. Still sitting on a small amount of shares, but feeling mighty good about the decision to sell it.

To: cnyndwllr who wrote (689)	3/1/2001 12:56:22 PM
From: kollmhn	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 23153

Sometimes greed clouds simple reasoning. If you looked at the chart of the NAZ you'd see, plain as day, a downtrend. One that has been going on for hundreds of days with only intermittent relief. Just what is it that makes a person think that he can pick the day that trend is going to reverse? To make REAL money, you have to OWN THE TREND, not fight it constantly. To continually go long, while employing tight stops, is tacitly admitting that your concern is on the downside. Really, who would want to risk being stopped out of a stock that that they thought was in an uptrend? Nobody. It's interesting that most of the conversations are about how, and when, to catch the low. Yet, very few are actually trading based on their true concerns, which ought to make them be short, not long.

To: cnyndwllr who wrote (689)	3/1/2001 1:25:46 PM
From: Don England	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 23153

luskin, at tsc, is running a primer on inflation vs. deflation for those who are not quite clear on it all. i mentioned that hays is looking for deflation, now cramer is, too. japan has had, i think, something like 40 straight months of falling consumer spending. good ol' king-cash. thestreet.com this could have an interesting impact on uncle al's 'liquid refreshment' binge. don p.s. i am throwing in the towel and going out into the yard to glue burst pipes back together and do a dump run. wife is adamant on ruining our white-trash look. i keep telling her that old toilet would make a really nice planter... visualize - geraniumns!

To: cnyndwllr who wrote (689)	3/1/2001 1:32:40 PM
From: William JH	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 23153

Ed, "Martingale" is a gambling system where the player doubles up after each loss, until hopefully, he wins a bet. Works fine most of the time, problem is, when it doesn't work the player experiences "gamblers ruin." I'm not implying that anyone is doing this, really just trying to warn about the dangers of averaging down. I hope I don't cause anyone to abandon a potential winning position. I've gone broke in many ways over the years, I'm sort of an expert in how to do it -g-