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: Mike Buckley who wrote (47355)	10/1/2001 10:04:08 PM
From: paul_philp	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 54805

Mike, Moore's original cash call from eight months ago. Sorry for the distortion. I am still shocked by the contempt this post received. Paul Message 15354056

To: Mike Buckley who wrote (47355)	10/1/2001 11:26:18 PM
From: Thomas Mercer-Hursh	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 54805

I infer from that comment that Gorilla Games might have come to a stop. That goes against the grain of some of the most fundamental stuff in his manual. I don't believe he really meant to imply that. If he were given the opportunity to review his implication that the Games have come to a stop, I'm sure (I hope!) he would use a different choice of words. Indeed, we in this forum, whether GM has or not, long since observed that a Gorilla may display somewhat different characteristics during a down period, but they are still unique gorilla characteristics. They may not be as obvious until the upswing begins, but I think there is good reason to believe that our gorillas will come out of this better than they went in, relative to the wannabes.

To: Mike Buckley who wrote (47355)	10/1/2001 11:41:19 PM
From: RobertHChaney	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 54805

Should GG fundamentally be played differently in bull vs. bear markets I will throw out my simplistic analysis for discussion. It appears obvious to me that bull & bear markets have huge fundamental impacts on potential GG companies and tech trends. So, I wonder if strong reversals in the economy/stock markets should cause a fundamental change in how GG is to be played, until those factors reverse themselves again. I would think that the portions of the GG book dealing with the progression of technologies & companies through the Chasm, Bowling Alley and Tornado (and the amazing effects that occur therein) may only be consistently useful in a bull market like most of the 90's. Whereas, in a bear market (like we are in now), the focus should probably be placed primarily on buying proven, mainstreet G&K's at bargain prices, based on historically low multiples seen in past recessions. Robert

To: Mike Buckley who wrote (47355)	10/2/2001 11:03:08 AM
From: que seria	Respond to of 54805

Mike: Moore noting and respecting an existing trend is, I grant you, "timing lite," but I suggest that respecting (as opposed to anticipating) an macroeconomic or sector trend of some months' duration offers more reason for confidence than the timing that attempts to catch tops and bottoms. Moore's comments of 8 months ago don't show an investor trying to catch a top (it was too late!): I think we are closer to the middle than to the end of the unwinding of valuations in the tech sector. . . . I think a very large part is a change in attitude among institutional investors about valuation metrics but do suggest some bottom fishing buy-in point: I do not think the sector bottoms until the P/S and P/E ratios of tech stocks begin to parallel those of stocks outside the tech sector. At this point, the sector would be deeply undervalued, but until we get to this point, I do not think it will be allowed to rebound. Needlessly to say, after we pass this point, gorilla game buying is a huge win. You and others are also waiting to identify a buy point. For me and many others market timing is not attempting to time a top and bottom of a class of investments since, like you, I know I can't reliably do that. Just spotting and respecting a well-developed trend, such as this bear market, helps. I've slowly learned it is better to save most cash until well after what looks like a bottom and reduce positions before the valuations hit historic peaks. I often do this on the sell side via covered calls, a form of market timing even if required to generate income. I suggest not all timing is equal, and some is consistent with your stated approach if you think you've seen either a top or a bottom in time to act on that belief. Such as: The 2000 peak in the Nasdaq was an apparent top, intermediate term at least, sometime last year. I believed it but didn't act because I was LTB&H. I look around at the macro picture and see nothing that points to LTB&H as a sound, all-eggs strategy now. It may be again but next time I'll take my cue from Mr. Market's pricing. I understand you to be looking at the macro picture (or at least valuations it yields) in deciding not to buy now; it's but a short step to doing that down the road in deciding on sales. I don't believe we've seen the bottom yet, but I'm holding enough to benefit from seeing it behind me after it comes! I would never go to all cash or all equities absent unprecedented and to me unsustainable valuations, such as profitable companies with growth prospects selling below book value and sales. We're getting there with lots of pebbles but not with gorillas.