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: Mike Buckley who wrote (54474)	10/24/2003 11:11:44 AM
From: Jurgis Bekepuris	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 54805

>I couldn't care less if anyone uses G&K strategies, > metrics or whatever; not caring about that relieves me, > and I assume everyone, of any reason to defend anything. And yet you spend time defending (maybe that's not how you perceive, but that's how I perceive it) G&K strategy in discussion with Dr.Id using rather selective examples. Why? >I often mentioned that G&K investing (in my opinion) >should be incorporated by very, very few investors. >That's also consistent with my statements that almost > everyone should be investing in index funds (primarily > if not entirely in an S&P 500 index fund), not common > stocks. Yes, you did, and I think this statement is worthwhile repeating. >I'd appreciate it if you would please explain why >you're taking the time to make the observation that > there isn't enough valuation being done here when > you could instead be offering valuations. I do offer valuations when I buy or sell any G&K stock. I don't see a point of saying "Now it's overvalued, now it's fairly valued" every month, but if there is interest... Right now, I don't see any G&K stock that I am interested in that is undervalued. I am not interested in any G&K with ROE consistently <15%, exorbitant options packages or management salaries. >That may be the point you were trying to make but the > point you were much more successful in making had to > do with "smug superiority." I believe you owe me and > the thread a public apology. Sorry, but that's exactly how "thread's" discussion with Dr.Id looked like. I accept that you have previously made the statement about G&K's suitability for only few investors. Thanks for it again. Jurgis