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 : Value Investing -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Dale Baker who wrote (14608)	6/11/2002 12:46:20 PM
From: Don Earl	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 78702

<<<TA is a minor factor at best on this board>>> I've noticed that. There hasn't been much focus on FA lately either. On trading vs. investing I've also noticed nearly everyone who posts here is buying or selling something on nearly a daily basis. As close as I can tell, the "long term investments" are those that are so far under water it will take years to break even, if ever. This is still one of my favorite threads on SI, but lately it seems like everyone has thrown all the basics out the window. Instead of solid research, the new strategy is to keep averaging into the latest falling knife to make headline news. I hate picking apart any particular stock mentioned on the board because it tends to create hard feelings, even though that is never my intent. Usually I just lurk and keep my opinions to myself. Or pick up a few puts if it looks that bad. IMO, it should be a healthy exercise to pick some of these apart on a regular basis. Virtually everyone who posts here on a regular basis has been investing/trading for years and has spent considerable time studying the market. It's kind of a shame to see this kind of information pool not realizing more of it's potential. I'll use ACN as an example. I took a quick look at it and this is what I saw: A twenty dollar stock with a book value of .28, debt to equity of .63 to 1, trailing twelve month losses of $1.14, earnings for the most recent quarter of .02 and a chart pattern that looks like a reversal top. Pulling up the "highlights" section of Market Guide, the pro forma earnings combined for the last 2 1/2 years are $2.77. My view is if they are telling investors how profitable they are, why is book only 28 cents? While I'm well aware of how the market likes to discount certain types of losses, it isn't a practice I'm impressed by. Where does the long term upside potential come from in a company that is chewing up shareholder equity by leaps and bounds while playing make believe with the numbers? So, maybe it's time to get back to basics. <<<What we are looking for are value plays. Obscene value plays...... .....We want to stay away from the obscenely high PE's and look at net working capital models, etc. Schooling in the art of fundamental analysis is also appropriate here.>>>