SI
SI
discoversearch

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.
Technology Stocks : Amazon.com, Inc. (AMZN) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: Bill Harmond who wrote (134684)11/13/2001 3:01:33 PM
From: Oeconomicus  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 164684
 
I rarely argue price.

Semantics, Bill. My recollection of conversations on YHOO a couple years ago is that you argued essentially that the true fair value of YHOO or other new economy plays could not be determined based on traditional measures of fundamentals, that it was pointless to try, and that one should just buy the "leaders". You may not have been arguing price directly, but by implication you were suggesting that the leaders were undervalued at any price.

It's one thing to be wrong about whether the fundamentals support a particular price, but you argued that traditional ideas about fundamentals and valuation no longer applied.

Bob



To: Bill Harmond who wrote (134684)11/13/2001 3:42:08 PM
From: GST  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 164684
 
O come on Bill... what about "screaming buy" "steal of the century" etc.



To: Bill Harmond who wrote (134684)11/13/2001 5:16:18 PM
From: GST  Respond to of 164684
 
LOL Bill, this is too funny. "I was very clear in March 2000, that I thought the market was going lower" You stated that you went 100% cash, the market dipped a tiny bit and then you jumped back in 100%, thinking that the worst was over with the Naz down around 4500 and then held -- and that was I believe February 2000 -- now you want to tell us about how you foresaw the market going lower? Is the big "W" for "William" or "Weasel"?