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 : Tang's school of business management for serious investors -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Arthur Tang who wrote (21)	8/22/2001 9:25:49 AM
From: Clement	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 57

Arthur: You ignore so many other factors in pricing as I point out. It must be nice in your little world that you can reduce complex problems into little convenient little sound bytes -- I guess your "management texts" don't date past the 60s. I didn't realize that professional consultants got so emotional... wait a minute.... > First thing first, so you don't look stupid. And you're telling me to learn how to write? I see english is not your strong point. Hmm... You amuse me Arthur. =) Clement

To: Arthur Tang who wrote (21)	8/22/2001 7:30:12 PM
From: Clement	Respond to of 57

Arthur: Your comments on Dell are fraught with holes. You may think that my thoughts are random but this does not change many fundamental truths. Gateway -- their most direct competitor is hurting -- per newsrelease today, their debt was downgraded to junk: dailynews.yahoo.com IBM has left the consumer PC market and HP is also hurting (a lot more than Dell). Dell is still making an operating profit and becoming a lot more efficient. Sounds to me like Dell's model is working. Ultimately there is only one way to know your strategy is working and whether or not you have build a sustainable competitive advantage -- it's called profits. Keep your eye on the ball. You've tried to deride me as being stupid saying that your management theories cannot be questioned, and yet your suggestions have been illogical, juvenile and unoriginal. To date, I've been quite successful investing in small caps based on what I would argue an ability to recognize value (after investing seriously in stocks for 5 years, my return is 56.7% c.p.a. including a positive return this year to date since Jan 1 of 22.4% -- of which I'm quite proud given the market conditions). Other than claiming that you're successful, what do you have to show for it but losses and a bunch of hot air? I can seen that your management texts are a little dated. In any event, why read textbooks when you can go to the source? Strategy is my pet interest so I would recommend as overviews the following: Contemporary Strategy Analysis by Robert M. Grant "What is Strategy?" by Michael Porter (HBR Article) For original content: The Loyalty Effect by Frederich Reicheld The Balanced Scorecard by Robert Kaplan and Norton "Profit Pools" by James Gilbert and Orit Gadiesh (HBR Article) Leading Change by John Kotter Profit from the Core by Chris Zooks Strategy Safari by Henry Mitzberg The Innovator's Dilemma by Clayton Christensen (this is the first book that thoroughly investigates and even coined the term, if I'm not mistaken, "disruptive technologies") May I suggest you try reading a little before trying to outwit someone who obviously has a significant advantage on you? The proof is in the pudding/profits. Clement PS I suggest you try proofing your statements before you make claims about others' writing skills.