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 (46135)	9/3/2001 3:12:13 PM
From: paul_philp	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 54805

John, For sure, the term Gorilla was stolen and bastardized to justify all sorts of evil valuations. However, because people ran off with the term and abandoned the rest of the book, it is hard to lay any of the bubble at Moore's feet. Paul

To: Stock Farmer who wrote (46135)	9/3/2001 3:42:29 PM
From: Uncle Frank	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 54805

>> One must believe that a stock is "undervalued" against alternatives to purchase it with expectation of gain. Of course, but holding period is a variable you shouldn't disregard in drawing any conclusions. >> Wasn't there still an expectation of long term gain in excess of alternative investments? Not universally. Some had short term gain in mind. >> Because if they had been behaving rationally they would have sold the stocks when overvalued and repurchased them later at fair value or less. You are making the assumption that it is possible to make such a determination in real time. How about offering some links to posts you made in 1Q00 that establishes you were capable of doing so. And if you were, why didn't you take the rational approach and short the Gorillas? uf

To: Stock Farmer who wrote (46135)	9/3/2001 5:01:23 PM
From: hueyone	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 54805

Way back when everyone was exclaiming how expensive their stocks were. Wasn't there still an expectation of long term gain in excess of alternative investments? In which case, the stocks were viewed as undervalued. Good point John. It was argued on a regular basis that Gorillas were likely to be undervalued in the long term even though some members conceded they were very expensive in the short term. The long term is/was supposed to make all well. The general response to those arguing against the proposition that Gorillas were undervalued in the long run was/is: Since we still have not experienced a "long term" cycle that incorporates the recent down cycle, the proposition that Gorillas are undervalued in the long run still has not been disproven. The other patented response was/is that those paying close attention to current market valuation of their company and basing their purchase on valuation information, were practicing "market timing"--- which has been discredited in many academic studies. However, in my humble opinion, the market timing that has been discredited in many academic studies has much to do with predicting short term stock price movements and very little to do with valuing a business. Best, Huey P.S. By the way, I am not aware of what current academic studies indicate regarding traders' ability to predict short term stock price movements, so my statement about many academic studies discrediting market timing applies to 20 year old studies. I don't mean to insult any technical traders who are now successfully plying their trade. Certainly knowledge in the technical trading side of things has grown tremendously in the last twenty years. I still don't understand any of it though and likely never will. <gg>

To: Stock Farmer who wrote (46135)	9/3/2001 6:25:19 PM
From: Mike Buckley	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 54805

John, Way back when everyone was exclaiming how expensive their stocks were. Wasn't there still an expectation of long term gain in excess of alternative investments? In which case, the stocks were viewed as undervalued. And if not, then well, it means that folks playing the gorilla game holding stocks they knew were over valued were behaving irrationally. I disagree. Do you really believe I was so stupid as to think I was getting a bargain when I was holding onto Siebel at the same time I was stating that it was historically overvalued? Tax implications are a huge factor that come into play, aside from whether or not I believe a stock I own is over valued. Not knowing what the next press release about a new source of revenue might be is yet another reason not to sell that has nothing to do with current valuation. You tend to express everything in black-and-white as if it can be easily tested with a concisely worded criterion, but investing isn't that simple or that easy. I think that explains why your posts tend to deal with theory rather than practice. Forgive me if I'm wrong, but I thought it was on the bestseller list for a while too. I have no idea. But I do know The Motley Fool Investment Guide was on the list, so maybe we should blame those authors and their readers on the tech bubble. As to whether Moore's book influenced the market? Well, of course it's hard to distinguish cause, effect and coincidence More than hard, it's impossible. So why mention it? Explaining that the book is a likely cause of the tech bubble is just another theory that has virtually no practical application in the world of investing. --Mike Buckley

To: Stock Farmer who wrote (46135)	9/3/2001 6:29:55 PM
From: Bruce Brown	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 54805

As to whether Moore's book influenced the market? Well, of course it's hard to distinguish cause, effect and coincidence. But given the sickening degree to which the term "gorilla" was being tossed around, I think the influence was significant. Not in its pure form as practiced by the elite, I grant you, but in numerous and remarkable derivative forms. Forgive me if I'm wrong, but I thought it was on the bestseller list for a while too. Hey, let's not confine the 'bubble' in valuations to technology alone. Buzz through some other household company names that Moore didn't influence. Through it all - thus far: The biggest of them all, General Electric, rose to $60 and fell to $36. Coke rose to $88 and dropped to $42. Wal-Mart rose to $70 and dropped to $41. Home Depot rose to $69 and dropped to $34. General Motors rose to $94 and dropped to $48. (As GM goes, so goes the market, right?) Caterpillar rose to $66 and fell to $29. Callaway Golf rose to $27 and fell to $14. And on and on..... BB