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: Jurgis Bekepuris who wrote (53725)	3/22/2003 9:22:49 AM
From: Stock Farmer	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 54805

Jurgis, I am not contradicting myself. In fact, I am still asking the question I was asking in my first few posts to this thread, a couple of years ago! Read carefully please. When I ask "why bother", that does not mean to say "do not bother". Unless of course there is not a reasonable answer. The fact that people are bothering suggests a reasonable answer exists. Either that or dogmatic behavior. Moore provided an apparently strong answer to my question: quantitative as well as qualitative. Some people accepted that answer and went about the practice of Gorilla Gaming. Then we "discovered" Moore's answer was bogus. But people keep following Gorillas for some reason. When I first read the book his reasoning appeared flawed. But still, many people followed the game, and the term Gorilla kept popping up right left and center. Leaving me wondering whether my obviously minority view was justified or not. If you review my posting on this thread it has been rather consistently challenging of the merit of practicing the activity - not the activity itself, but the espoused reasons for it. Difference. I strongly suspect there is value in getting to the bottom of this, but that we aren't any where near yet. As for your most recent answer, it is not strong. Not because there is no grain of truth, but because it lacks quantitative elements. Furthermore, since it is possible to appropriately value non-gorillas as well as gorillas, isn't there a possibility that other factors besides being a Gorilla (or not) come more strongly into the final equation? In which case we might be better off identifying these, n'est pas? As for Thomas' answer, it is different. It too is weak, and lacks applicability to practical investment - although he qualified this by explaining his interest was academic and that was OK since this thread is focused on academic issues rather than applying them towards investment. If everyone posting to this thread was uniformly only identifying Gorillas out of purely academic interest, I would not be posting my questions here. John