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.

Technology Stocks : LSI Corporation -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: DWB who wrote (24238)	9/28/2001 10:01:59 PM
From: Jock Hutchinson	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 25814

Dipy my friend. It's one thing when thugs like me attack you, but when a class act like DWB starts in--well I dunno. But you clearly raise a valid point. And the real horror scene is if we go to regional economy (i.e. economy where we trade only in the US and with its partners) as opposed to a global economy. That's the equivilant of Smoot Halley, which clearly was a primary factor in the length of the Great Depression. And under those circumstances, your scenario could become a very real and scray proposition.

To: DWB who wrote (24238)	9/28/2001 11:57:05 PM
From: sea_biscuit	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 25814

DWB, In the first instance (picking "crap" stocks), I was reacting to Addi's previous statement that I don't know anything about tech stocks (well, at least I know when to sell them!). The second one (about being in a bull-market even now) is in response to Addi's arrogance that I will never get back in because I am "paranoid", when in fact, unlike Addi, I have demonstrated when to hold and when to fold. The third (about "bubble stocks") -- I don't know what makes you think that's arrogance. I am just saying that we won't see a mania like this again for two generations. It is just a statement. The fourth (about my prediction that Addi is probably bullish again) is the only one where I could be accused of being smug. Maybe I should have said, "I suspect it is the former..." instead.