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: Stock Farmer who wrote (44508)	7/16/2001 12:11:45 PM
From: Uncle Frank	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 54805

I asked the question of Earlie in an attempt to better understand his perspective, since I've found many disagreements are simply due to differing standards of holding periods. >> I would point out (politely at first but if necessary, then less so) that the much vaunted "Long Term Buy Hold" mentality of successful investing is not called "Forever Buy Hold" by accident. Your point is appreciated, but the threat isn't. Should you reach the stage where you find it is necessary to abandon polite discourse, I'd hope you would find a more appropriate forum. >> Maybe it's just me, but I fail to see wisdom in the word "Long" being interpreted such that any occasional selling after 6 months or (rarely) six weeks or even (more rarely) six days disqualifies an investor being "LTBH". No one has applied that standard. There are very few monks among us, and I'd guess that most have traded. My Evil Twin has been known to swing trade options, and sometimes 6 hours has been long enough to achieve his targeted returns. But the primary focus of this specific discussion group is on identifying stocks with sustainable competitive advantages over long term holding periods. uf

To: Stock Farmer who wrote (44508)	7/16/2001 1:36:05 PM
From: EnricoPalazzo	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 54805

This foundation established, next I would point out (politely at first but if necessary, then less so) that the much vaunted "Long Term Buy Hold" mentality of successful investing is not called "Forever Buy Hold" by accident. It is not called "Five Year Buy Hold" or "Fifteen Year Buy Hold" or "Bury me with my certificates" and so on. I doubt that impoliteness will be necessary, but our definitions of necessity may differ. Indeed, for those who have skill and intelligence and a certain amount of experience, it is not the most effective strategy at all. Really? Warren Buffett might beg to differ. Witness the last few months which have set even our Gorilla portfolios back to 1999. Really? I'm not aware of a five-year (let along a fifteen-year) holding period for many members of the G&K index that has not been profitable. Are you? p.s.--I wonder how the short-term traders did in 2000. Be careful about clearly stating your point. If your assertion is that valuation matters, you'll get a lot of (sheepish) agreement on this thread, e.g. from me. If your assertion is that the last year in some way vindicates a short-term approach, you'll get very little agreement on this thread.