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.

Politics : Formerly About Applied Materials -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Jacob Snyder who wrote (54226)	10/17/2001 2:39:23 PM
From: Gottfried	Respond to of 70976

Jacob, re >All internal communication will happen electronically from now on. No paper transferred from person to person.< It's already happening. Some newspapers no longer accept snail mail to the editor. I compare the war on terrorism to the war on crime: it never ends, but we continue living. Gottfried

To: Jacob Snyder who wrote (54226)	10/17/2001 2:40:45 PM
From: michael97123	Respond to of 70976

"I think investors should be thinking about the secondary and tertiary effects of 9/11. We are already seeing a lot of talk about the need for information systems to be more distributed and redundant. Jacob, Its more than talk. As i see it in my industry there is the beginning of actual movement. It's a year since there was any business at all in my space and now it seems we will be quite busy by 2nd quarter next year. But we wont celebrate or go public with this until it actually begins to happen. Once burned twice shy and given the non-business news anything can happen. My belief is that this anticipation is driving the markets higher. Stop looking at current business and look out to next spring and a recovery especially with all those Greenbucks(printing press) and Bushbucks(deficit) out there along with gas at barely over a buck a gallon in certain areas. Mike@edgy.com

To: Jacob Snyder who wrote (54226)	10/17/2001 4:01:53 PM
From: michael97123	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 70976

JS, Is that 1643 number key tomorrow? mike@nowwearelosingmoneyagain.com

To: Jacob Snyder who wrote (54226)	10/17/2001 4:30:30 PM
From: advocatedevil	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 70976

ST-Trading Well, I let my emotions get the better of me and bailed early on my shorts this morning. The early AM market rise and abrupt Anthrax reversal caught me flat-footed questioning my short-term conviction. I should have stepped back and reflected on why I initiated the plays in the first place, but instead opted to shoot first and ask questions later. My second recent rookie mistake. The other one was when I let my break-even stop-loss hit on a re-test of $27, thus giving up a decent purchase of some long-term AMAT shares. On the bright side, while I did leave plenty on the table, I managed to book a respectable 6% short-term gain on significant positions. I remain partial to the dark-side here and live to trade again. AdvocateDevil

To: Jacob Snyder who wrote (54226)	10/17/2001 8:47:04 PM
From: Sam Citron	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 70976

Jacob, Are you implying that there may be a silver lining in this tragedy for the IT sector, as videoconferencing becomes our virtual airline, e-mail (despite virus fears) replaces anthrax mail, and video gaming replaces tourism? Let a thousand surveillance systems bloom, but I just don't see terrorism as a killer app. The market's superfast recovery from 9/11, whether due to an excess of patriotic zeal or the televised pyrotechnics over Afghanistan, rather reminds me of the market's initial explosive reaction to the Fed's first rate cut, a reaction that soon gave way to snores. In spite of the recent resilience of the stock market, my sense is that the economy is in much worse shape than it was on 9/10. You are correct to inquire about the indirect effects of the tragedy, but in my view they are even more negative than the direct effects. Many of these effects are rather far reaching and distant from next year's income statement. My concerns are (in no particular order) the risks of rearming Pakistan, China, India, Russia and any other state that professes to help us fight "terrorism"; being further drawn in to the powderkeg of mideast politics as bin Laden forces us to face the unpleasant contradiction in our foreign policy of supporting undemocratic regimes which may be viewed as increasingly offensive to their own citizens; the end of the "open society" and its civil liberties that we took so much for granted; increased suffering for Afghanistan as we respond to their destructive tactics with more destruction. As for the market, I suspect it will not only retest the post 9/11 lows but continue to sink as the Taliban take refuge in their mosques which no missile will dare to attack and as it becomes apparent that even if we were to destroy every "terrorist camp" in Afghanistan, they would just pop up elsewhere as graduate schools for the madrassah. I'd like to be much more optimistic, but I just don't see the silver lining at present. Just as with Iraq, I fail to see an endgame in Afghanistan.

To: Jacob Snyder who wrote (54226)	10/18/2001 9:08:30 AM
From: John Trader	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 70976

Jacob, It is interesting that there are so many logical, yet conflicting, arguments that one can make as to the effect of Sept. 11 on the markets going forward. On the one hand the whole thing can be considered as a huge negative for markets and economies all over the world. On the other hand, as Greenspan just pointed out, humans are incredibly resilient, and if history is any guide, have been able to bounce back quite well most of the time. I think you made a good point about how we got used to living with the cold war. I recall a talk by Warren Buffet in which he referred to the all the negatives that would follow in the world, looking back to the year 1919 when Coke was in retrospect a fantastic buy (the great depression, WW-II, nuclear weapons, the cold war, etc. were on the horizon). As Buffet pointed out, despite all that, the thing to do back then was to buy shares in KO. What is the "KO" that we should be buying right now? One possible outcome here is that the attacks could mark the bottom for technology spending. It seems to me that this whole thing should be a boost for investment in technology, whether it be storage backup systems, video conferencing, email instead of p-mail, a new government intranet, flash-memory national ID cards, surveillance systems, or improved technology and additional spending in the area of weapons. Regarding teleconferencing, I have always thought that the USA uses too much oil - I was thinking just in terms of using up a finite and precious resource. When one considers the stability of that part of the world, there are additional arguments for the USA to become more efficient at communication, and it seems to me that technology is the answer. Having said all that, I am left with mostly just a vague idea at this time of where to invest right now in the tech area. Recent investments have included QLGC, CIEN, and JNPR. One last comment: I think our media may be part of the problem at this point. I am referring to the fact that our media hardly ever puts things in perspective. Just saw a short story where it was pointed out that 42,000 Americans died in automobile accidents last year vs. about 300 in airplane crashes. I am not trying to downplay at all the terrible evil and horror of the Sept. 11 attacks, but we do need to try to put it all in perspective. Also it was pointed out in this story, the many deaths caused in America by smoking, alcohol, obesity, etc., vs. the one death so far by Anthrax. Seems like our media is being used by the terrorists to amplify the terror. John