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: paul_philp who wrote (52061)	7/13/2002 10:12:56 PM
From: Stock Farmer	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 54805

spitting hateful bile? Pardon me, but from this side of the one-way-mirror it looks a bit different. In the past I've endured being called a moron for the audacity to suggest that investing in stuff due to be cut in half and in half again (and then some) wasn't wise. And for suggesting that the Gorilla Game is flawed... well... even worse. I have been cast as a vile character with evil motives, posting negative messages so that stocks will fall in price. And other nefarious characterizations. As if individuals who have never met the person behind the pseudonym have a hope of seeing my "true colors". True, I do doubt the wisdom of an investment strategy that leads to purchasing a financial instrument without reference to its price. More than that, I think it is dangerously unwise. If by implication I am "attacking" those who do such a thing because it would subtract from them the label "wise" or attach to them the label "unwise"? Well, the saying is "if the shoe fits, wear it". What should I do? Hmmm... [soandso] does this thing so maybe it's not as unwise as I think? Maybe I should try to preserve his reputation by pretending I think it's a brilliant strategy? No, that would be dishonest. I think it's unwise and I have a right to say so. Maybe I should just sit silently by and watch as it is advanced? Like those folks in parks who watch an old lady get mugged and do nothing. I see people getting hurt and I have an urge to do something about it. It's not as if I've been standing in the way of anybody earning obscene profits! And 'tis also true I do not toady well nor spend my time admiring the cut and style of non-existent clothes. If people shout "Yes he does, you moron!" to my observation "He has no clothes", then I have no difficulty pointing to the birth-marks and blemishes on the emperor's all too visible body. Is that being a bully? I am sure it looks that ways from the emperor's eyes. Certainly it must be embarrassing. Dress the part and stand naked in the cold? Neither the weather nor the consequences are my fault. Quite some time ago I posited here that the basis of the Gorilla Game was flawed. Indeed I tried to demonstrate that from an economic basis we should expect the game to deliver undersized returns relative to the space in which it is played. Except at that time it was merely theory and I had better things to do with my time than endure the storm that such heresy stirred up. Particularly facing the offered "proof" of outsized returns... those that hadn't yet evaporated. But here we are today. And that "proof" has evaporated. Since 5/95 SEBL has doubled. That's an 19% p/a return on investment. Which rocks! Proof positive, ex-ante, that investing in Gorillas is indeed a successful way to riches. If of course you pick 'em right. But strangely enough, the pick 'em right strategy from TFM didn't lead us there. It didn't flash the "dump SEBL" signal either. I am also pretty confident that Mike wasn't rigging the game to fail. Thus the conclusion is that the flaw is in the method. At least under some conditions. Which might trigger some thoughtful exploration. Because the time is drawing closer when the market will turn and we could all enjoy using an improved and more robust investment strategy when that happens. Now, it is still your perogative to see hateful bile in that message. It is not intended. My posts on this thread are intended to be real-time observations on an investment strategy. Sometimes laced with my style of wry humor... some people don't like Terry Pratchet either. So as for your line in the SI sand, I'm afraid that it is indistinct. If I go farther than the "thus far" of your demarcation... well, please let me know. John.

To: paul_philp who wrote (52061)	7/13/2002 10:23:25 PM
From: hueyone	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 54805

You know, I have seen JS generously post extensive analysis on the Cisco thread while coming up with his estimate for an intrinsic value for Cisco. He went on to defend, explain or modify his number as folks critiqued his inputs, outputs or assumptions. A number of people found this exercise valuable even if they did not agree with his methodology or act on his conclusions. Posters willing to share the details of as well as defend their estimate of an intrinsic value number (or any detailed valuation model for that matter) are rare indeed on SI. I learn something every time we get posters who are willing to share a comprehensive analysis, whether it be for Gorilla criteria or valuation criteria or both, and regardless of whether or not I agree with them. Of course your own considerable contributions are duly noted in this regard, and are much respected and appreciated. I have learned from both you and JS. I hate to see the leaders of this thread chase JS away, who I feel is another person that has something worthwhile to contribute. There seem to be a large number of posters on the thread who feel purchasing a Gorilla at a “reasonable price" is an important part of the game---even though this was not emphasized in the manual nor in the thread charter. There also seem to be a few gamers in cash like Chaz that are in the process of determining their re-entry points. JS can be an important contributor to any ensuing valuation discussions even if one disagrees with JS' view of "reasonable price" or one prefers to use other criteria. If nothing else, clarifying in one's mind why you disagree with someone else's analysis can be useful. In the words of the immortal Rodney King (or was it Tekboy?), “Can’t we all just get along?” JMO, Huey