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 : Stock Attack II - A Complete Analysis -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Lee Lichterman III who wrote (17563)	9/3/2001 1:53:48 PM
From: Captain Jack	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 52237

WRONG-- he had the bubble burst! There were indications the economy was slowing. So he throws in a 3/4 point anchor to weigh it down hard and fast. He did what was required a bit late to assist Gore-- then came in strong. The nas at 5K-- if not senility why did it run so far so fast without AG intevention? Instead of admitting an error and fixing it he waits until it is beyond his help. No matter what some think-- he is an old man not a financial god,, mistakes are expected and acceptable if repaired and admitted. Instead, the ego and belief that he is able to fix everything,,, LOL! Ever since Rubin left AG has been showing his weaknesses.. everyone has them but few are held above the role of human. However, being 100% bonds will offset history,,, it will say he knew what to do but his inept attempt at timing the rate moves indicated his dimenished mental capability late in life! As Lee states... there are companies that move up every day--- If the fed is going to delate bubbles they should do so very early-------- and with finess... like AG used to be capable of doing. Members of the FED now admit they do not know why the economy has not yet began to turn,,, LOL! AGs torpedo put one hell of a hole in the boat. More than one small (5% gpd) compartment has been flooded.

To: Lee Lichterman III who wrote (17563)	9/3/2001 2:00:41 PM
From: TraderXx	Respond to of 52237

Lee..you must not be a trader. For all of us to see an end to the so called "bubble" or more volatile days, is to see and end to alot of traders making money on these swings up and down. Its so funny to hear guys like you who moan and groan about valuations and I encourage it wholeheartedly (its obviously a valid argument). But just like your opinions and your disdain for the "bubble" mentality, thank god there are others who feel we have entered a new age of "investing" where technologies and the companies who engineer these technologies have years yet to reap the profits ( but in my opinion will eventually). This whole valuation argument has been going on for the history of the stock market, but if it were to just orderly follow valuations like you say it should...man..we would all have a boring market!.... and also most of us traders would be out of a job..now wouldn't we? LOL..Good luck to ya TraderXx

To: Lee Lichterman III who wrote (17563)	9/3/2001 3:18:52 PM
From: Trading Machine	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 52237

I read a lot of your's and Gersh's posts and enjoy them for the most part. However, if either one of you think that you're not gambling just like the NAZnuts two years ago you had better wake up! I am not an accountant or an economist, or even a very good stock market trader. But the one thing I do know is that if a company has a real P/E of more than a single digit, they have some pretty wild expectations. And anyone who "lends" them money is foolish. And lets be brutally honest, unless you are a buy-and-holder of a stock that intends to keep it for a number of years (not in the single digits), you are not a LENDER, you are IMHO a speculator aka a gambler, someone who expects the paper price to go up so that he/she may sell it at more than what they paid for it. Who would be satisfied with reaping dividends once or twice a year with very little increased value to the stock? Them days are gone forever! On second thought, they may be coming back sooner than any of us expected, even Big Al.gggg I, like a lot of other people, view the stock market and trading in it as a zero sums game. In order for someone to "make money" or "win" somebody has to loose money. This true with rare exception unless the company happens to increase in worth during the period of time you are holding their stock, and consequently the value of the percentage of the company's note of indebitness to you (the share of stock) increases. So what are we really talking about here, do you really expect the company's stock that you just bought to increase in value during the few days or perhaps weeks that you hold it? Or are you just trying to sell paper to someone else that wants to speculate? I would suggest to you that a lot of people in 1998 fell into the category of gamblers. This is not a value judgement, just an observation. AG ended the game prematurely because his sense of values dictated that he do so and he had the power to do it. Thus, it was done. He, nor anyone that I know, doubted the outcome of what he did at that time. What is in doubt is how you stop it once it has started! I have read a lot of utterances from people who profess to be economists in the "know" from Ruben on down. From what I have read so far, they are all in doubt. They simply are dumbfounded as to why we haven't turned around yet. Being an ABSOLUTE novice Gambler, I don't know what it will take to turn the train, I do have confidence it will turn! Since I am a ripple/wave trader/gambler, I don't care which way it goes so long as it ripples! Having said that, I do care and feel for the thousands of people every day that loose money because of what AG has done. If he had not done it these same people may have lost more. I dunno, and I suspect when AG says his prayers at night, deep down in his heart he doesn't know either! If he and his God are the only ones who know, how can anyone else? Just another shameless opinion by someone who doesn't know either. ggg Good luck next week whether you intend to lend or gamble! Paul K.