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: gdichaz who wrote (49010)	11/17/2001 12:01:15 PM
From: paul_philp	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 54805

Eric, I agree with your discomfort about Geoff Moore's recent post. Reading it again I see another interpretation. Recently the GGlist has been exploring so not-quite-Gorilla companies - like SanDisk. Moore could have been saying - stay away from those high risk puppies and stick with the proven Gorillas. Just a thought, Paul

To: gdichaz who wrote (49010)	11/17/2001 1:15:37 PM
From: Eric L	Respond to of 54805

Cha2, re: "established" gorillas are (in)sufficient. Like you, and like Bruce, they are not sufficient for me. They may be for some, and particularly for those that relegate tech to a relatively small portion of their overall portfolio, and are particularly risk averse, or have little time to spend on DD in techs. I should add that I consider myself to be somewhat overweighted in gorillas at the moment, but in addition to the 4 major silverbacks I hold, I am heavily weighted in the younger and more agile Qualcomm, and also hold Siebel, and YUK! I2. Provided that you watch Kings closely, I consider them to provide valuable balance to a portfolio. The fact of the matter is that there are several important tech sectors that are gorilaless, and likely to remain so. Mobile wireless (broadly considered) is one, as is WLAN. Storage is another, as is optical equipment. There are many more. I very much like Bruce's approach to holding small-caps, mid-caps, and large caps. That is simply fundamental investment common sense. UNPH was a mid-cap when I purchased it, and neither UNPH or Qualcomm had the requisite market cap at the time of my purchase to warrant discussion here - according to a strict interpretation of our charter which we rightfully ignore when conditions warrant. In a very real sense, I think this thread would serve little purpose if we simply discussed "established" gorillas. I can think of nothing more boring than talking about Cisco, Intel, Microsoft, and Oracle, all week long, to the exclusion of other investments. I (we) did DD on them guys a loooooooooooooong time ago. On the other hand Investors that don't hold these critters can benefit from discussions about them while they are "on sale" as they certainly were a few months back (and could well be again). In addition all of us that hold silverbacks need to reexamine where these critters are in the TALC and whether or not there core business are threatened by discontinuous innovation. I have long thought that the charter of this thread was to find the next Cisco, the next Qualcomm, the next EMC, the next UNPH, and as you stated well: IMO this thread has been invaluable for its in depth discussion of gorillas and kings in clarifying their status as gorillas/kings and for the process of searching for new gorillas and kings. Egad! We agreed again. <g> Meantime, as for Geoffrey's comments, I think that the main thrust is that market conditions are uncertain, and at this time established gorillas are most likely to lead the market back, when the market is ready again to be led back by techs. The most eloquent bear in the world will never come close to convincing me that techs in this information age will not lead back. I understand where he is coming from, but Geoffrey himself could not convince me that Kings with cash, and with brand, and with market dominance, will not participate in lock step with the gorillas, in leading techs and the overall market back. - Eric -