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 : Cisco Systems, Inc. (CSCO) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: GVTucker who wrote (53352)	5/23/2001 11:29:23 AM
From: Wyätt Gwyön	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 77400

I am afraid we are going to end up arguing apples and oranges here. Which is to say we are not disagreeing so much as having different starting interpretations of what the discussion is about. I thought I didn't have to have meta-discussions anymore now that I'm out of college <g>. Interesting that you should mention KO. Would you say Buffett was wrong when he measured KO's intrinsic value to be higher than the market and bought 200 million shares? Again, my point is not whether he is right or wrong, but whether it "mattered" to him. So my universe of discussion is rather self-consciously subjective or perhaps you could say solipsistic here. I have also felt for a long time that KO was overvalued, just as I think CSCO is overvalued. And because my measure of intrinsic value in those cases was NOT reflected in the market, those measures of intrinsic value were quite irrelevant. That just shows you that your model of those cos. or your assumed model of market expectations (the Keynesian picker of beauty-contest-winner-pickers) was irrelevant, untimely, or both. So your opinion was not borne out by market validation, so in this sense you are right. But still, your opinion mattered to you, which is the sense I was alluding to and is the sense in which I am right.