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 (51965)	7/10/2002 12:49:09 PM
From: slacker711	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 54805

It doesn't account for fraudulent filings, nor does it account for corporate lying. I don't care how much due diligence a Worldcom or Enron investor engaged in...in the end, he was going to get screwed. A couple of thoughts.... - There will always be insiders who have more information but the internet has narrowed the gap between individual investors and institutions pretty dramatically. - Enron's balance sheet had raised red-flags to lots of different people before they went under. It wasnt that these investors knew exactly what Enron was doing but that it was so overwhelmingly complicated that it was impossible to decipher. It might just be worth staying away from stories like this all together. You might miss a couple of good ones, but you would probably come out ahead. - For me, Worldcom was simpler. Do you want to invest in a company where the company gives a huge loan to the CEO to meet a margin call? Way to much reason to defraud investors when your CEO is on margin... Of course, none of the above would have helped us avoid QCOM or SEBL....but the problems there dont have much to do with our lack of information. Just my two cents.... Slacker

To: Dr. Id who wrote (51965)	7/10/2002 12:56:10 PM
From: Mike Buckley	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 54805

Id, I think that you perceive that doing your homework protects you against these kinds of activities. It should, but it doesn't. Not to be mean spirited, but if you haven't poured through SEC filings for years, I don't believe you're operating from the perspective of an informed opinion. I'll ask a second time: have you made it a habit of regularly pouring through SEC filings? If so, I'll continue the discussion. If not, there's no basis for a discussion because you're willing to come to an opinion about the credibility of the available information without knowing first hand what the information is. --Mike Buckley