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: Don Mosher who wrote (48310)	10/25/2001 1:35:49 PM
From: Pirah Naman	Respond to of 54805

Don: I think it was very nice how you showed the disconnect between share price being a "measure" of competitive advantage and investor's non-rational, non measured responses. I think ti was great that you could apply your professional background to explain this. - Pirah

To: Don Mosher who wrote (48310)	10/25/2001 2:06:52 PM
From: Uncle Frank	Respond to of 54805

Outstanding presentation, Don. >> [To be continued, if this part helps.] Most assuredly. I'll look forward to part 2. uf

To: Don Mosher who wrote (48310)	10/25/2001 4:25:29 PM
From: paul_philp	Respond to of 54805

Don, Excellent piece. I now know what it is like to pass the puck to Wayne Gretzky. Paul@MutualAdmiration.com

To: Don Mosher who wrote (48310)	10/26/2001 3:20:22 PM
From: gdichaz	Respond to of 54805

Don: My first comment on your Fault Line post is, thanks. When I first read the Fault Line, I was taken by many of his ideas given as advice to managers as a wake up call to "get with" the new management requirements, especially thinking through what is essential or the essence of the company's strength - its core - and that which is not; and that the "assets" of the company are its people and its intellectual capital not plants and equipment. In other words, the "soft assets" which are most difficult or perhaps impossible to quantify, are key, whereas the "hard assets" which can be more easily quantified and are the focus of much accounting tradition, are much less important to the company's "shareholder value". He then attempted at focus on "shareholder value". But his timing of publication was very unfortunate, since he caught the dotcom excesses timeperiod almost on the nose. (And his message could have seemed to suggest that the internet and dotcoms were the essence of investment opportunity) The result was that people who tried to invest in the companies his logic seemed to lead to went into them near the top of the huge run up. But reading your post is a reminder that his ideas seem valid but he was "a little ahead of his time". He was done in by the "bubble", not by poor analysis or his ideas and concepts - which he put into clear language for managers. I particularly appreciate your perception that he was "selling these ideas and concepts" to managers who he considered "old line" and so he pushes hard for effect. That is the major presentational weakness of the book IMO and your excepts, summary and comments allow us to see the essence of his message without the excesses of the sales pitch. Your post shows that if we take Geoff Moore's ideas in the Fault Line and apply them over the next year or two, this can give those here who wish to consider them carefully an advantage in their own investing. If those ideas have merit, then now may be the time to consider them most seriously. His focus on "shareholder value" is a key contribution of the Fault Line. Further discussion and refinement of that concept might be useful if individual companies were discussed with that as a focus. Again, thanks. Look forward to your part 2. Best. Cha2

To: Don Mosher who wrote (48310)	10/26/2001 8:40:07 PM
From: Wyätt Gwyön	Read Replies (4) \| Respond to of 54805

hi Don, some of the quotes you provided from that book leave me truly saddened and amazed... From Profit and Loss to Market Cap. Total market capitalization has become the new scorecard for business competition because it unambiguously ranks all of businesses globally across industries. Accounting is trapped in a P&L view of the world, but investors "get it" (or, at least, they did until the prices collapsed). uh, market cap, yep: Priceline, TheGlobe, YHOO, QCOM, CSCO, INTC, GBLX...there's over half a trillion in market cap lost right there. my guess is that those same companies will not earn half a trillion, in inflation-adjusted dollars, over the next hundred years. that's what they mean by gone ta money heaven, i gesss. it is terribly sad to realize that some people, living on a distant planet (Bubbleonia) on the outskirts of the known universe, have perhaps learned nothing from the collapse of the bubble. does anybody on Earth actually believe this quote? all the Bubbleonians out there, if you're listening, please explain why profits don't matter but market cap does. i will try to understand the complex logic of Bubbleonia if it does not overly tax my tiny Earthling brain. unfortunately, Bubbleonia is so far from Earth i doubt i will get a reply from them within my lifetime (Earth being in the Slow Zone and all). so it goes...