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: Curbstone who wrote (51911)	7/8/2002 2:33:57 AM
From: Uncle Frank	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 54805

Well said, Mike.

To: Curbstone who wrote (51911)	7/8/2002 10:27:48 PM
From: Stock Farmer	Read Replies (4) \| Respond to of 54805

But using something as precious as truth as if it were a common can opener does a disservice to the beauty of truth itself and does little to enhance the character or credibility of the one so using it. Nicely phrased. Got me thinking though. Where precisely is the beauty in the truth that the 2002 GKI is down 46.7%, YTD? Or that the 1999 GKI is down 26%? Perhaps it's useful to discuss the message in absence of the messenger. And to use words that we won't find objectionable. Perhaps take Frank's own words in post #312 to this thread in reference to the GKI when it was first established. Message 7970228 . Back then, Uncle Frank stated "The resiliency of our selections is yet another proof of the strength of G&K investing." When we peel aside the veneer of phraseology, the logic of Sir Auric and Uncle Frank both turn on the same dime: that returns measure the strategy. Perhaps Sir Auric was gloating. Perhaps Uncle Frank was boasting. Both made the same observation in different words and were twisting the truth to their own ends. One when the GKI was down and the other when GKI was up. We could perhaps make moral judgements about the use of truth to line a boast, or the use of truth to seal a grudge. But as adults we could rise above that and go to the truth itself. Me, well, I don't have the world's firmest grasp on the definition of "polite" as it applies to this thread. But I don't fear articulating what appears to be the truth. GKI-like returns suck. Frankly speaking. Once upon a time G&K investing looked like a grand strategy. At the moment it doesn't look so good at all. Maybe some day it will look good again. Time will tell. Sure is fixin' to be an uphill battle. We can whine about whoever points that out. Go trot them out to SI Jail as evil malevolant individuals. If we like. But that might mean forgetting about having planted an I Told You So seed in the fertile soil of "prosperous investing". And it would certainly mean burying the truth. Or we can objectively review the foundation of the investment strategy and see if we can identify systemic flaws. Which is really hard to do if we don't admit that any exist. Who knows. Maybe it's perfect. Personally, I doubt it. I line up with the view that returns are the only measure of an investing strategy. John