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 : Oracle Corporation (ORCL) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: TobagoJack who wrote (15498)	3/3/2001 11:25:46 PM
From: MeDroogies	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 19079

You're a funny man. You imply alot from a little. I never said GE would be around forever, but for an incorporated company, it's done fairly well. Which company, alone among all others, has been in the Dow (or its equivalent) for 100 years? GE. That's a pretty damn good record that says alot for its management and its structure. No guarantees on the future, of course, but a pretty good bet when you compare it to other companies. They are flexible, smart, and fast (and I worked for them for 3 years...). If I didn't know better, I'd guess you couldn't spot a feudal structure from a mile, but I'll give you the benefit of the doubt. To say ORCL's structure is feudal is to ignore a few things: 1. ALL corporate structures are, technically, feudal...that is to say, they are based on the command and control of people and the means of production (land in feudal times, capital now). 2. Feudalism was authoritarian, whereas publicly held companies, technically, are not. 3. Feudalism relied heavily on having more people beholden to the desmesne whereas capitalism (and particular ORCL) is geared toward less reliance on larger headcount. There are arguments you can take either way...but in reality, ORCL is the farthest thing from feudalism than most other companies (and I've worked for a few that are pretty damn close). To say that trusting ORCL's execution isn't a wise idea is like saying trusting ANY company's execution isn't a good idea. I prefer to focus and trust companies with proven records. The likelihood is as long as the management is stable and experienced, you can count on them (unless they have flawed business plans like Chainsaw Al) to execute AND have a reliable vision. ORCL has remade itself 3 times. While not on the same level as GE, the comparison holds....just on a different scale. I agree that this is not Vegas....but in many ways, it has similarities. It pays to study gambling because the psychology of the gambler is precisely the psychology of Wall Street (don't even try to argue against that...) when you consider the short term (Keynes proved that), whereas it is entirely different over a longer term (something else Keynes proved indirectly by investing as wisely as he did...as so many others have proven, too). You have to have a bit of the gambler in you to make the bet in the first place. If you're into the timing of the bet...that's different matter...then you are right. I'm not timing this market. As for the bull market not requiring much skill...which you imply...I'd say you're dead wrong, because in the first year of it - 4 years ago - I got killed. And I had a bunch of good companies in my stable of holdings. Thing is, I was holding them for the long term. Here I am 4 years later and while the first year of the bull market had me in paper losses of over 35%, I wound up beating the market substantially over each of the next 3. So, skill has ALOT to do with it. Allocation is important, too. But I was HEAVILY into tech. I sold heavily out of tech last year. Even so, it still is over 40% of my portfolio, and with good reason. If you haven't figured out why yet, you best learn what software is and how it works. GE had the chance to AOL 6 years ago, and is still kicking themselves over it (don't believe it? you weren't there when I was). MSFT had the opportunity to own the web 5 years ago, and blew it. Don't think they are pissed about it? Both of them have made excellent and valiant efforts to catch up. Why would these two companies spend so much effort on something you have marginalized? Because they know something you don't. And they are going to continue to spend money on these things, and try to expand in these fields. As they do so, the market will continue to expand, and the company in the middle of it all (ORCL) will benefit whether they maintain their position or not.