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 : Sharck Soup -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: American Spirit who wrote (20768)	5/7/2001 9:05:25 AM
From: j-at-home	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 37746

last off topic post: AS, With all deference to Sharck (his thread), I wouldn't post (almost never do) unless I was tired. It's your tone that's so bothersome - when combined with your history. I find it time-consuming to post during the day and a low-priority anytime else. Wish some with little to say would post accordingly. Is ego or loneliness the motivation? I posted (trades) in '98 & '99 but honestly felt it took away from the time better spent reading contributions of other (MORE) knowledgeable traders or of those with specific knowledge in areas in which I was weak. When I visit SI I'm looking to read these posters. Some are currently in industry offering perspectives unavailable to me. Others are traders whose view I want. As a full-time trader you can feel iso’d from emerging trends. I've been checking the NCZ for about 6 months and Sharck's thread (whom I don't know, never directed a post) about the same, maybe a little less than six - since I found myself on the same side of a couple good trades. Your recent posts, on the other hand, caught my attention on the NCZ and here. I don't censor (click ignore). Posts get out of context that way, and rarely is anyone so annoying. There can be some benefit to OCCASIONALLY reading the perspectives of those I absolutely don't agree with – it may even be comforting -g. As for well-considered thoughts that are opposite my immediate trading position or perspective those are not merely well received but sought. To me, that’s the difference. Those who have been consistently wrong are avoided like plague; most (of them) learn to reign in their prolificacy (albeit not by their choice). Give a moment's thought to the fact that the bull position in any bull/bear debate cannot be enhanced by your involvement. There are better-equipped proponents to lead that fight. Your bandwidth clutter and "indignation" and perception of other’s contempt happen to those who strive for high-visibility without the goods (to back it up). I certainly made MY share of trading mistakes in 2000 - the ease of '98 and '99 masked many weaknesses and rarely was any price paid. 2000 was a reality check and lesson in the importance of discipline. I’ve traded most tech names these past 3+ years - including a significant number of dot.coms (dot.bombs). During much of the long slide of 2000 I checked for info related to my positions everywhere including Yahoo! The one thing about a moniker like "American Spirit" is it is fairly memorable. And as you know, American Spirit was in every bottom-falling, downward spiraling, self-imploding, piece of tech crap - and here's the kicker - posting with an unfailing confidence as the index went 5K, 4k, 3k, etc. that "this was the opportunity of a lifetime", "this is amazingly cheap", "this is going up next week", and "you people should be buying like crazy here", etc. etc. etc. In fact, it reached a point for me that if I had a doubt about a position and saw your name appear, I considered it the final kiss of death - the ultimate confirmation that I better sell. There must have been eight, ten, twelve, complete disintegrations I witnessed in which you were active. I actually told a couple friends (lots of gallows humor last year) about this dude who kept picking my biggest losers and then some. I managed to avoid at least three purchases due to you arriving on the board in a timely fashion with your usual unfailing belief. I have no idea if you still post on Yahoo! or if you continued your bullish direction during what was a painful early 2001 for many, but you were certainly holding positions for months on end up until the conclusion of the third quarter. 2000 was a truly astonishing year but must have been phenomenally bad for you. I had 5 or 6 severe casualties in 2000 and didn't wake up until the end of the third Q. The best decision I made was to return to demanding a fundamental rationale for valuation and focusing on macro events. I stopped posting, became more disciplined, took my final material tech losses and reversed course. I’ve stayed largely short tech with a few exceptions, and long energy resulting in six good months. I've been [and am] predominantly short throughout this rally and still managed a SOLID April. Recently I had to read some of your posts (as I said NCZ and Sharck are two spots I check). I see you’ve become a SI “regular” and active poster these past many months. From my vantage point, very little has changed. My impulse is to consider shorting any stock you mention or recommend. It comes from the same suspicion and doubt I apply to comments from a good number of analysts - who have been particularly inept or inaccurate. At least in those cases it may actually be deception or dissimulation at work. You’re a high-wire act.