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 : Booms, Busts, and Recoveries -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: TobagoJack who wrote (7690)	8/25/2001 10:13:45 PM
From: Maurice Winn	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 74559

Jay, thanks for the warnings. I listen carefully to warnings and try to separate the voodoo from the real. As in fractal math, scale up from QUALCOMM and see that its chart might be applicable to other companies, private balance sheets, governments and then varoom, success. Because humans seek success rather than failure, success is the natural state of human affairs. That's why we have the big lumps over our eyebrows. Statistically, success is sexy and failure isn't. Statistically, success is the norm. Failure and especially deliberate attempts at failure, are self-limiting and leave the field clear for success. Failure cannot win. Success is inevitable. Failures are glitches, not the norm. In passing, I saw a comment that claimed that governments are artificially limiting the price of gold. It occurred to me that while that is probably not true, if I was running Fort Knox or wherever governments store gold, I would be wheeling it out for sale if people show up with a lot of US$. I understand there are a LOT of tons of it stored. If it is sold by governments to the US$-fleeing Aztecs, is there enough of it to stop prices rising substantially? Maybe the Aztecs, trying to escape by buying gold, will be kept in the cage by a wall of gold. They will try to buy their way through the wall, but maybe they don't have enough $$ to do it. Mqurice PS: Re Globalstar <It was the wrong focus, badly structure, incorrectly phased, with badly worked out economics, and no pilot marketing whatsoever, because the leaders were not leaders, oblivious to the risk they place shareholders’ money. ...Failure is generally setup by a combination of design, execution, and chance events going wrong.> All true. But all those things were trivial. At any time, they could have decided to price the system correctly. They chose not to. It was very much a single-mode failure, though as you say, exacerbated by things such as bad luck [the Zenit crash], mismanagement [the exclusive service provider agreements], badly structured [too much debt and conflicts of interest] ...