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: Uncle Frank who wrote (48278)	10/24/2001 4:44:53 PM
From: Thomas Mercer-Hursh	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 54805

only the curmudgeon thread survived the separation surgery If you want to call that survival...

To: Uncle Frank who wrote (48278)	10/24/2001 5:01:34 PM
From: Judith Williams	Respond to of 54805

UF-- prefer a solution that integrates.... That's got my vote. Our Hunt and Network reports all spend a good deal of time picking apart not just a company's competitive advantage but trends in the financial statements. I've been toying with the idea of doing a Hunt on ARMHY as I'm looking at it closely. Maybe I'm just a neophyte to this one but at least in ARMHY's case the relationship of competitive advantage and valuation seems particularly acute. It's still awful pricey. Judith

To: Uncle Frank who wrote (48278)	10/24/2001 5:51:20 PM
From: areokat	Respond to of 54805

I'd prefer a solution that would keep the valuation efforts integrated with the nomination and vetting processes, but bias it towards practical issues rather than general or theoretical ones. Good points.And he only said bias it, not eliminate general/theoretical. I don't have much skill in this area so don't make any contributions but I do follow the discussions and agree that they have value. Keeping the valuation posts on this thread will be more valuable to all. IMHHO. Kat

To: Uncle Frank who wrote (48278)	10/24/2001 8:39:13 PM
From: Mike Buckley	Respond to of 54805

I'd prefer a solution that would keep the valuation efforts integrated with the nomination and vetting processes, but bias it towards practical issues rather than general or theoretical ones. Agreed. --Mike Buckley

To: Uncle Frank who wrote (48278)	10/24/2001 8:55:40 PM
From: JohnM	Respond to of 54805

For what it's worth, I'd prefer a solution that would keep the valuation efforts integrated with the nomination and vetting processes, but bias it towards practical issues rather than general or theoretical ones. Makes sense. John

To: Uncle Frank who wrote (48278)	10/25/2001 2:31:17 AM
From: chaz	Read Replies (4) \| Respond to of 54805

uf--,plus Thomas, Pirah, etc-- IMO, the thread needs valuation practice and theory. My job involves working with inexperienced woodworkers who come along, pick my brains, and then go off and do what they were going to do anyway, and who then come back and ask me what they did that produced such lousy results. This just drives me up the walls. So, a proposal has been made to me...why not write down what you know (about finishing, in this case) in some sort of little pamphlet that we can package for sale. So I've been thinking about that, trying to develop some sort of format that would take a reader through a certain step, explaining it in both theoretical and practical terms. String these steps together, and you can call the whole a finishing process. Maybe a similar idea is what we need. Example: Today, I think ABCD company is worth $X. Here's how I arrived at that figure. Since the company's stock is selling today for $X+Y, that means I think the company's stock is over valued by Z%. (Or undervalued, or fairly valued.) Someone else might say: It looks like you focused on the balance sheet. If you plug in CFC, and here's how I did it, you'd find that ABCD is not undervalued at all. Could something like this be useful here? I'm a valuation rookie...I mean a real rookie...so this may not make any semse at all, but if it does, would this be an improvement over what we're doing now? Chaz Chaz