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 : Three Amigos Stock Thread -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Ditchdigger who wrote (24383)	3/30/2001 10:15:50 AM
From: JoeinIowa	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 29382

DD, I bought QQQ puts yesterday. There just is no buyers coming in so volume is light and stocks are headed down. MU is getting mauled this morning like it probably should. Did you see all the warnings today? There will be more next week. The key is who and how bad. I'm amazed at some of the levels of layoffs. When 20-30% of a work force is layed off it also has the effect on the remaining ones. Productivity can also take a hit. Plus it costs a ton to layoff and then rehire. All drags on the economy. Joe PS Plus once the NAS starts to roll under again there are no buyers(except shorts covering) to pull it out of its tailspin. My friend the MAG man says NAS 100 of 1492 is a likely target.

To: Ditchdigger who wrote (24383)	3/30/2001 1:23:20 PM
From: Sergio H	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 29382

I like it Ditch. Sergio ps Window dressing about complete.

To: Ditchdigger who wrote (24383)	4/1/2001 12:57:52 PM
From: Sergio H	Respond to of 29382

Hi Ditch. Hope you are enjoying your weekend. Hopefully thawing. I've been heavily invested in energy stocks, indirectly in alternative energy through electric utility mutual funds. Ed Yardeni's newsletter mirrors your outlook on alternative energy stocks: <Sunday morning, April 1, 2001 COMMENT: The new international sport is Bottom Spotting. Everyone wants to get credit for spotting the bottom in stock prices. Suddenly, everyone seems to be using the Fed's Stock Valuation Model to show that stocks are 5% undervalued. I don't recall that the model was so popular among all the bulls when it showed that stocks were 70% overvalued at the start of last year. I would love to pick the bottom too. But there are enough strategists working on it now that I think focusing on sector performance might be more useful. In the past, the key to outperforming the S&P 500 has been to pick the one sector that was most likely to be the decade's big winner. In the 1980s, it was the Consumer. In the 1990s, it was Technology. Now my pick is Power (i.e., energy resources, utilities, distribution, and capital spending). A reasonable estimate is that we will spend at least $200 billion between now and 2005 to expand electricity-generating capacity. (Energy & Utilities are still only 10% of the S&P 500 market capitalization versus 26% for Technology & Communication Services.) Reflecting our economists' more negative outlook for the rest of the year, I am lowering my rating to under weight for Capital Goods, and market weight for Transportation and Financials. I am raising Health Care and Utilities to over weight. Energy, Consumer Cyclicals, and Basic Materials remain over weight. Communication Services and Technology remain under weight. Both may be oversold and overdue for rallies, but Tech's problem isn't just over-capacity and bloated inventories. Many of the most profitable innovations of the past decade have become low-profit-margin commodities--the "Calculator Effect."> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ A safer way to play sectors? Something new to me; MITTS. Interesting article in this week's BizWeek on MITTS. An excerpt: <Here's how they work: Consider an S&P 500 MITTS, MLF, which trades on the American Stock Exchange for $10.17 a share. It was originally issued in June, 1998, when the S&P was at 1119, and is scheduled to mature on July 1, 2005. On that date, the MITTS holder will get $10 a share, no matter where the S&P is, and if the index is below 1119, that'll be all. Should the S&P close above 1119 on that date, the MITTS will pay the appreciation above 1119, less an adjustment of about 1.3% a year for expenses. Suppose the S&P is at 1600 when this MITTS matures. After adjustment, it will pay about $3.04 per $10 share, for a 30.4% gain. It's a good deal shy of the S&P's 43% gain, but that's the trade-off for eliminating downside risk.> Also from the same article, a link to more information and details on MITTS and similar investments: amex.com Sergio