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 : ahhaha's ahs -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: KyrosL who wrote (4331)	5/5/2002 1:17:39 PM
From: ahhaha	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 24758

You recommended fiber optic suppliers like JDSU recently. False. I said they had put in major bottoms and that is exactly what is occurring. A major bottom is not defined by a one day effect and it isn't defined by an absolute low at which one shouldn't buy anyway. I also said that one has to wait for the major bottom to be put in place, wait for a basing period, and then wait for a break out from the base before one would be justified in buying. That didn't get any mention although I've said it many times on this and other threads. If one knows with perfect certainty that a stock has reached its absolute low, one still isn't justified in buying. It takes about 20 years of investment experience before one assimilates the profundity of this. But their customers, the telecoms, are still reeling and hitting new lows. How could telcom supplier stocks go to absurd excess prices on the upside when the telcoms were dawdling at best? If that wasn't justified, then neither is this downside. How can the suppliers be good bargains here when their customers will continue to reduce their capex budgets for at least another year? I don't accept the premise and I don't believe you know the future. Why believe the stock market? Was it right about the future it was "discounting" in '99? Putting in a major bottom doesn't mean a stock is a bargain. It could random walk in a base for years as a "bargain", eventually breaking out to substantially higher levels confirming that it was a bargain. Why buy a bargain which you don't know it is until after the fact. Why not buy something that is expensive. Just ask yourself why is it expensive. The level of capex spending is likely to determine the overall ease with which marginal ventures can float shares, but that doesn't mean that the circumstances of individual suppliers must deteriorate if capex is reduced. Reduced capex means capex dollars are carefully invested instead of being squandered by being thrown madly at anything that promises a pot of gold at the end of the rainbow. Your problem is to determine which companies are beneficiaries regardless of capex. This is always the right problem to address. Otherwise, you're only trying to determine the next fool fad and its attendant inflation. Even if you guess right about it, it still tends to bag you. See gold. Or do you see an imminent reversal of the telecom's fortunes. You have stop to looking at the investment world in general terms. Who can invest in "telcom"? You have to invest in individual telcom companies if you like the sector. In the past you could have thrown money around foolishly and done well in anything the media called "telcom", but the name game is over. Aren't we all glad that being rewarded for being a fool is over? If this is so, why not buy the telecoms rather than their suppliers? Because there's always a greater fool?