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.

Strategies & Market Trends : Booms, Busts, and Recoveries -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Street Hawk who wrote (2213)	3/2/2001 2:09:49 AM
From: heroes4sale	Respond to of 74559

Streethawk, Thanks for the calculations. Do you have any thoughts on the Dow's value? Regards

To: Street Hawk who wrote (2213)	3/2/2001 8:11:14 AM
From: Wyätt Gwyön	Respond to of 74559

Nice study of Naz fair value, Street Hawk. One comment I might add is that if fair value is in the neighborhood of 1500, and if the index has traded far above that value for many years, we may have a period were it trades far below that value for many years also.

To: Street Hawk who wrote (2213)	3/2/2001 9:54:32 AM
From: rolatzi	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 74559

Nice calculation. It would be useful if you could extend the fair price data out to 2002-2005 since there is certainly a good chance that this market will not recover immediately, that it will go sideways for several years and that it will overshoot on the downside and then come back up to fair value over the next few years. Thanks, rolatzi

To: Street Hawk who wrote (2213)	3/2/2001 10:37:09 AM
From: Tommaso	Respond to of 74559

Thanks for the carefully reasoned estimate on the NASDAQ. I guess that if I agree with you, I ought to be short QQQ, as I was earlier, but I think I will just stand aside and wait for true values. It's a whole lot easier and more fun to make money on the long side.

To: Street Hawk who wrote (2213)	3/2/2001 1:54:41 PM
From: smolejv@gmx.net	Respond to of 74559

...if 1994 to 200x were same as 85 to 94 then... But they were not. Remember the "times they are a changing" tune? New economy? We all believed it then. Made money on it. PE? Fuuurget it. EPS? Dont make me laugh. I would not want to swing the other way. Its a question, what's - ahem - normal. Given normal a) inflation rates b) treasury ROI c) risk premium then, well, still some way to go (am short in and out last few months). But then, was I dreaming when PEs were tripledigit? My account tells me different. In a nutshell: do not extrapolate. Not too much at least. Like "Lets see how much that would make in 2010". 11% yearly ROI, stupid, from now on. But although I like 11% plus better than zero, I loved those 150% times... dj