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: advocatedevil who wrote (55256)	11/8/2001 5:30:23 PM
From: Jacob Snyder	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 70976

Not strange at all. What you say is true, and it affects the markets, so it needs to be included in calculations. But it works the other way around too. Sooner or later, we'll find him, yes. But, in the meantime, there is the ever-present danger of another spectacular attack. Our enemies have surprised us twice with their capabilities. Odds are, they will surprise us again. And, with winter coming on, the earliest that major ground operations can happen in Afghanistan, is next Spring. So, we live with that threat, till then. At least. The effect of this on the market is, a general increase in volatility. Both the potential upside and downside are increased, for all stocks. I've noticed that option premiums are up. The potential for another attack (and the potential for it to be worse than the WTC), is the main reason that I am steadily increasing my cash position, even though all signs are toward a liquidity-and-debt-driven reBubbling. I want to have some cash to buy the bottom, when the markets reopen after the next attack. If that sounds cold, well, so be it. My job is to protect and grow my wealth. What stocks I buy and sell affects me and my family, but has zero effect otherwise. So I'm going to position myself to try and take advantage of the increased volatility, in both directions.