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 : Booms, Busts, and Recoveries -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: EL KABONG!!! who wrote (25419)	11/14/2002 12:07:04 PM
From: JHP	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 74559

<<LU is failing/has failed for many reasons, and the myriad reasons were not entirely visible to analysts or investors.>> bull sh*t deals that were financed at upto 250% of the money needed! and YOU knew this,but ignored it...this was disclosed as early as 1997. LU customers could not get financing so LU put up the money! the same with the rest of telcom land.. as soon as LU was a stand alone company, it was phony bizzness all the time, this was so easy to spot. "Common sense the most uncommon sense of all"

To: EL KABONG!!! who wrote (25419)	11/14/2002 9:28:56 PM
From: pezz	Respond to of 74559

KJC, My intention was not to cast stones at analysts...I think in many cases they have a thankless job.The point was if those who spend 40 hrs per week studying a company and still their "expectations" can and often are so wrong then this whole "investing" scene IS gambling! What happened to LU was a result of all the many variables out there that cannot be factored into "expectations" Having said that I do believe that there are smart gamblers and suckers.A smart gambler finds weakness in the odds and exploits them. After all the odds (price) are set by fallible human beings. It's just because analysts are wrong so often about companies I tend to look at stocks rather than companies.