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 : Value Investing -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Paul Senior who wrote (16135)	1/10/2003 8:55:23 PM
From: Investor2	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 78594

Hi Paul. I hope you've been well. Did you happen to catch the RPM action today? (Big drop.) The second quarter conference call, available at the following link, was quite interesting. rpminc.com Mr. Sullivan painted a very grim picture regarding asbestos liability, not just for RPM, but for 1400 other companies. I believe I heard him say that, unless Congress passes a law limiting liability associated with asbestos, many, many large companies are likely to be forced into bankruptcy. The full impact would likely hit in FY 2004. I'm sure that you and other posters have given some attention to the asbestos issue. What do you think? Thanks, I2

To: Paul Senior who wrote (16135)	1/10/2003 9:11:48 PM
From: Investor2	Respond to of 78594

PS - If you're interested in listening to the conference call, the asbestos stuff starts at about the 33 minute mark of the conference call. Best wishes, I2

To: Paul Senior who wrote (16135)	1/11/2003 3:08:21 AM
From: Don Earl	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 78594

Paul, There are a lot of days when I don't understand my own strategy, which makes it twice as hard to explain to someone else what I'm doing at any given point in time. I do try to identify value from a more or less traditional fundamental perspective, but once I think I've found one, a lot of TA gets thrown into the mix. I suppose what it comes down to is I can't see any reason to let market makers and day traders keep my profits when they're on the table. Interland is probably as good an example as any since it's been one of my pets since September 2001. If I had "invested" in it at my first entry price of $1.17, I'd be sitting here 16 months later at break even, after letting a ton of trading profits get away. Doing fundamental research from a value perspective I think gives me a better feel of what the market should be paying at any given time. Most of my INLD trades were based on the assumption that fair value was about $2.50 and anything much below that point was a buy and anything much over that point was a sell. I don't know if it makes sense or not, but it's a company I sort of view as being part of my portfolio even when I don't own it. It's also a situation where I consider the company to be a lot less speculative than it was a year ago, and buy and hold may end up being the better way to play it. I suppose my reasoning is if a company is a good longer term value, it should also be a good shorter term trade. Plus, since the topic is value investing, I figure I should at least touch on the subject every once in awhile.<g>