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.

Technology Stocks : Long Term Investors' Outpost -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Uncle Frank who wrote (361)	8/8/2002 4:17:18 PM
From: hueyone	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 562

It doesn't matter if you bought qcom at a dime or 100 dollars. It is strange that I find myself defending LTB&H against the founder of the LTB&H thread, but all kinds of strange things are happening nowdays. <grin> In my view the two examples are entirely different. It doesn't look like the first investor, who for one reason or another ended up buying at a discount to intrinsic value, will lose any initial investment capital, whereas there is a chance that the second investor may end up losing initial investment capital. In the long run, an investor who buys at a discount to intrinsic value, expects to have an opportunity to recover his initial investment outlay and then some. In addition, when the disconnect between intrinsic value and market value becomes extraordinarily wide as it did during the bubble, Warren would likely sell and reinvest in more attractively priced opportunities---although currently he does have a problem of having more cash now than for which he can find attractive opportunities to deploy that cash. JMO, Huey

To: Uncle Frank who wrote (361)	8/8/2002 4:22:50 PM
From: Jurgis Bekepuris	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 562

>It doesn't matter if you bought qcom at a dime or 100 > dollars. Either way it went up to 200 and is now at 25. However, if you were using valuation, you would not have bought it at $100 and you would have sold it at $10 after buying it for $1. >Ltb&h and ignoring macroeconomics, as both Buffett and >Moore recommend, simply didn't work during this cycle. So how come you split from G&K thread and established this so-called "Long Term Investor's Outpost"? Maybe you should rename it to "daytrading when it works"? And BTW, I would like to hear about approach that "worked during this cycle". Momentum investing? Astrology? "I did sell everything at the top, honest"? Finally, I did not think you were so naive to think that Buffett does not ever sell - he does. Or so naive to not see that some of his choices are not ROI based - he does not sell some things even he may know they will go down in value. Jurgis - enquiring minds want to know