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 : A.I.M Users Group Bulletin Board -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: aptus who wrote (15216)	3/10/2001 10:49:41 AM
From: labestul	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 18929

Hi Mark, Thanks for your comments. Basically I agree with you on your comments about value. Certainly if one were to consider only one of value and share price then value is the right one. However I believe that it is better still to consider both. Let me try to encapsulate the main point that I was driving at (at least implicitly). Even though the basic AIM algorithm is not based (at least directly) upon the number of shares, once one introduces a minimum transaction constraint of the form "5% of market value" then one has implicitly added NUMBER OF SHARES to the mixture. Of course the specific number of shares depends on the number currently held and so is VARIABLE. From this it is natural to generalize and conceive of a CONSTANT number of shares.This is in effect what the Money Spinner does. Thus one can say that the Money Spinner approach can be viewed as a variation of basic AIM with a "5% of market value" type of constraint. I did not mean to imply that this method is necessarily superior (or inferior) to AIM, only that it is a variation. In practice I would never do anything without considering VALUE. Looking forward to seeing you in Vegas, Barry