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 : Gorilla and King Portfolio Candidates -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: tekboy who wrote (40518)	3/17/2001 9:00:17 AM
From: Larry S.	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 54805

Gorillas vs "Nifty-Fifty" - This may be the wrong thread to ask this question on, or the right on, but here goes. In the 1960s and 70s there were certain stocks that were considered the "Nifty-Fifty"- companies that were leaders in their fields and had dominance. the stocks sold at high multiples, that were justified by the quality of the companies, the leadership in respective fields, and seeming unstoppable growth potential. some of these companies were IBM, Xerox and Eastman Kodak. At the same time, mutual funds were growing in popularity, people were rushing to put money into the funds that invested in these companies in the belief that they would continue to prosper, increase in stock price, and make money for their investors. Alas, things changed, some of these companies fell from grace, and the investors in mutual funds, after seeing their capital erode, pulled out of the funds and stopped contributing. Many of the nifty fifty companies fell from grace and their stock prices never regained the lofty levels of those times. Could today's Gorillas suffer the same fate as the nifty fifty? We have great companies, QCOM, EMC, CSCO, MSFT, add your favorite Gorilla or King, that everyone had to own, are leaders in their field, have barriers to entry, disruptive technologies and dominant market share. They sold at high multiples that were justified by their incredible growth and leadership in their respective fields. The mutual funds stocked up on them and people kept buying the Janus and Firsthand funds that were prescient in recognizing these great companies. Later, other fund managers had to own these companies too and filled there portfolios with them. Hmmm, is there an analogy building. There remains a significant change that the carnage in the marketplace, particularly the dow, has wrecked such havoc with retirement accounts, savings, and morale, that we are but in the midst of an even steeper decline, one that will take longer to come out of than anyone other than the ultra-bears wish to consider. OTOH, there are incredible piles of money building in MMFs that is ready to return to the market when there is a restoration of confidence, or at least a belief that prices will stop their downward spiral. And the economy is strong, employment is high. It feels that we on the pivot point of a great teeter totter, the end could swing back up, or back down. The threads on SI have become almost dormant. people are beyond shock, though that famous word "capitulation" is not quite fulfilled. This thread is like the last bastion of intelligence, though not without its stubborness. thank you. larry larry@hastheskyfallenorisitjuststarting.fuk

To: tekboy who wrote (40518)	3/17/2001 9:02:09 AM
From: tekboy	Respond to of 54805

I'd add one more lesson too, on reflection: as things go up into the stratosphere, gradually take little bits of the windfall profits off the table here and there, so as to play increasingly with the house's money and avoid feeling like a total schmuck if/when things go back down. tekboy/Ares@totalschmucksRus.pov

To: tekboy who wrote (40518)	3/17/2001 10:08:45 AM
From: Mike Buckley	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 54805

I'll generally never again recommend stocks to others. I never have and never will. The most I'll do is mention the stocks I own or companies I'm familiar with. In the former case, I present them in the context that if you want to buy them, you might go down the tubes with me or fly to the skies with me. But since you didn't buy them at the same time I did, you might do worse or better than me if you do buy them. Regarding companies I'm familiar with, I mention them in the context that after further research I might buy them were it not for the issue that there's no place in my portfolio for them. A lot of people admire the reasons I don't give stock tips but many wish that I'd provide a tip or two to them. That's human nature. --Mike Buckley