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.

Technology Stocks : Cisco Systems, Inc. (CSCO) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: kvkkc1 who wrote (56752)	1/17/2002 10:41:27 AM
From: Dave	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 77400

kvkkc, This market is based in no way on anything resembling fundamentals Then history will repeat itself, again and again. Models can tell someone how a company is expected to perform in the future. However, not all models are the same. The "GIGO" principle applies here too. If ones assumptions are garbage, the model, too, will be garbage.

To: kvkkc1 who wrote (56752)	1/17/2002 11:19:42 AM
From: Stock Farmer	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 77400

Sounds like a load of crap to me. Or more true than we'd want. The only fair price of a stock is in the moment of its trade. Absolutely correct. Where that is the metric of fair. The only fair price of a stock is the present value of it's economic potential. Also correct. When that is the metric of fair. Those who think their standard of fair is the only thing going are the ones who are full of crap. At least, by my standard of fair ;) Maybe you managed to negotiate "Life must be fair" into your contract, but you would be the first I've ever met. So even if we suddenly do find some universal standard of fair, Enrons and Airlines (and MSFTs and Ciscos) will continue to make fools and liars of us all. None of us knows where the price will go. And in the grand scheme of things we all don't know jack. But we have opinions. Which are just that. And in the scheme of one, that's all that counts. Meeting somewhere in the middle is what society is all about. Which isn't fostered by labelling differences with pejorative terms like "crap". IMHO. John

To: kvkkc1 who wrote (56752)	1/17/2002 5:40:06 PM
From: RetiredNow	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 77400

I would agree with you except for one thing. There are people like Warren Buffett who have consistently kicked the market's and everyone else's butt in returns on investment.

To: kvkkc1 who wrote (56752)	1/17/2002 6:15:46 PM
From: Stock Farmer	Respond to of 77400

Now that we've resolved the perspective issue, some thoughts. It's kinda goofy to listen to a momentum guy talk about trades he plans to make 3 months in the future based on today's action. So not unreasonable to assume that an FA guy's computations are irrelevant in the next few days or weeks or even months. Yet both have perspectives on whether or not it's a good idea to buy or sell a stock now, which often generate different conclusions based solely on the timeframe over which the perspective is intended to be measured. And both can be opposite and still turn out to be correct - each measured in its own timeframe. And both can even be held simultaneously by the same person without contradiction. We've seen folks with the most pessimistic outlooks post a temporary long position as a trade, for example. And we've seen folks who have a large long base post a trade on the short side. But a perspective on a stock price is irrelevant outside of the intended evaluation period. Where irrelevant is merely a nicer way of saying "crap". John