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.

Politics : High Tolerance Plasticity -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Warpfactor who wrote (14738)	6/28/2002 4:04:03 PM
From: kodiak_bull	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 23153

Warp: I agree, basically, although we're going to want to be careful on the timing. The best time to invest/start a business/etc. is when all the carbonation has been gassed out of the beer. Recrimination abounds, we're almost there. Have a good weekend, Kb

To: Warpfactor who wrote (14738)	6/28/2002 4:19:15 PM
From: stockman_scott	Respond to of 23153

<<Don’t lose sight of the tremendous good that is coming out of today’s focus on the corruption of the past. It is remaking America, and it needed a lot of remaking as Worldcom’s and Enron’s fraud has so vividly exposed>> I think Hays does a good job putting things in perspective. Enjoy the weekend. regards, -Scott

To: Warpfactor who wrote (14738)	6/29/2002 10:55:51 AM
From: que seria	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 23153

Warp, et al: Here are some ideas, mostly long and tech, I will act on later, not now: stockcharts.com\|B\|F All but the last two are stocks I'm looking at to buy; I shorted RYL and JPM next to the close Friday. Doing it next to, not at, the close cost me, because JPM ramped $.50 on huge 4:02 p.m. buy volume. Being now cynical about gov't machinations, and given my fundamental reasons for being short JPM and long gold, I don't think it was value players crowding in, but officially sanctioned firefighters at work with one eye on JPM's hedge book and another on the gold price. Stop a meltdown before it starts has to be the feds' watchword with the dollar teetering here. I may be early but I've kept LT protective calls in place on JPM. I'm using a tight stop on RYL; could be early there too but I like the bumping up and down from resistance. I used to scoff at the Le Metropole folks (i.e., GATA) as loonie tunes fringe elements, until one of their contributors uncovered the evidence (in federal records) suggesting huge "loans" or swaps of US gold with Germany, such that we hold German gold in trust over here. The inference being that we swapped our gold for theirs, sold our "German" gold over there, and thus much of the gold in our vaults (how much?) is what we hold in trust for Germany or others. All that would be required to dissipate my cynical view on this issue is for the feds to make a full, explicit, verifiable response to the accusations (I think it was Reginald Howe who uncovered this). I think the president wouldn't outright lie straight to the American people about such a huge breach of trust as selling off a large part of our nation's gold. Understandably--if they did it--the feds prefer to ignore the issue.

To: Warpfactor who wrote (14738)	6/29/2002 11:31:12 AM
From: que seria	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 23153

Warp, thanks for the Hays piece. My historical lesson is a bit different from his, though. His comments and mine: Today’s economy and stock market is not even close to being like 1929-32, when there was not an effective Federal Reserve, or Department of Commerce, or Securities Exchange Commission. True about the economy and market (so far), but how can I take comfort in that if our tech meltdown occurred when all of those agencies were (by comparison) effective, yet did not prevent widespread corporate corruption? Given the disconnect between a sanguine investing public and pitiful investing fundamentals, all we can have confidence in here is our confidence itself. (Speaking of the tech market). Eighty percent of those “runaway” super-star Industrial Revolution stocks were driven into bankruptcies. The corruption and moral decay of that era was rampant, but that period caused a moral reawakening in the upcoming decades. From which I infer, by historical analogy, we have barely started our "reawakening." So here we are having survived the last decade. Well sure we did; it was the biggest boom ever! We are barely more than two years past the point at which the market cracked. This isn't the 1930s, or Japan of the last decade; we aren't predestined to molder for 10 or more years. However, given our current state, I would only place small and ST bets on a 2 year end to what would be about a 20 year round trip (dating the bull start to 1982). The “runaway” super-stars of 1999-2000 have been brought back to earth, and many, many of them have been driven into bankruptcies. I think of "back to earth" as something akin to historical valuations. Don't know what Hays is looking at, but I struggle to find any techs to buy on a fundamental basis, even with my too-often-proven willingness to be forward-looking. #$@$%^% expensive trait, I can tell you! I agree with you and MH and others about buying sound but badly beaten-down tech companies, using tight stops. I assume Hays preaches stops too, but for most people mental stops aren't practical and physical ones get run. And the bubble that was fostered and applauded while it was expanding so dramatically has now been deflated. We have experienced a round trip. If so it would be one without precedent, with tech valuations at the "bottom" being much closer to historical valuations at a top. And make no mistake, he is talking tech, not broader market, since his commentary is explicitly about the "runaway" stocks. I was expecting a bigger, earlier summer bounce, and I expect we'll still get one of some kind from some point. For the intermediate term, and possibly LT, I think it is precisely Hay's comparison to history that cuts against his optimism.