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: Dr. Id who wrote (51962)	7/10/2002 11:26:56 AM
From: kumar	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 54805

To me, its really simple : if the kitchen's too hot, get out of it. cheers,kumar@nothotenough.pov

To: Dr. Id who wrote (51962)	7/10/2002 11:37:59 AM
From: Mike Buckley	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 54805

Id, One illusion created in the last few years ... was that the information provided by the internet had levelled the playing field for the small investor. I didn't realize that that was a widely held illusion. For me, the Internet didn't do anything to level the playing field. Instead, it allowed relatively easy access to information on a timely basis that simply wasn't possible prior to usage of the Internet. Some people might think that access to information is in itself a form of levelling the playing field, but I don't. It's how we use the information that levels the field, not having the information. How does the small investor have faith in a game that has (and will continue to be) rigged? Anytime there's enough money and power at stake, there is always the potential for rigging. Investors who understandably don't want to take the time to exercise the necessary precaution or take that risk should consider investing in an S&P 500 index fund. How do we trust the information that we're getting to be able to invest with any confidence? Do you pour through SEC filings? If so, let's continue this discussion. If not, it's irrelevant in my mind to wonder about the credibility of the filings if we don't study them and base conclusions on the information they contain. And if we don't do that, we shouldn't be investing in common stocks in the first place. --Mike Buckley

To: Dr. Id who wrote (51962)	7/10/2002 12:36:46 PM
From: tekboy	Respond to of 54805

first, you didn't comment specifically on his perceptive observation about the grace of the writing... second, you're right about the fact that small guys and outsiders are destined to have less and less good info than big guys and insiders, but I don't think that by itself this prevents such investors from getting better than average returns. Why? because as we've seen, and demonstrated, there's a lot of good info out there available for skeptical scrutiny, and anyway our own psychologies, attitudes, approaches, foibles, and so forth are the most important things affecting our portfolios' performance in the long run. As Kipling wrote, the real trouble is keeping one's head when all about one are losing theirs. tb/A@nofaith,nohope,needcharity.com

To: Dr. Id who wrote (51962)	7/10/2002 4:17:58 PM
From: alanrs	Respond to of 54805

Personally, I've always assumed the game was rigged to some extent. Recent disclosures have shown it to be even more rigged than I thought. It does make it tougher. It's like the dice table at Vegas. It's "rigged" so that the house takes in 10%? 15%? of everything bet. However, there is a way to play at about 99.4%. That's close enough to even so that if one manages the bet size and cashes out on a positive run, the table can be beat. I've done it enough times-I have family in Vegas. It is work and it's very boring, however. Obviously, in the midst of the worst tech performance in 70 years, my performance also stinks. So now we are in the very boring part of tech investing. ARS