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: Mathemagician who wrote (54549)	11/1/2003 10:38:33 PM
From: Stock Farmer	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 54805

You only have to do it better than the other people in the market, i.e. process the available information faster/better than others. Agree fully! What it says is that advantage in the market is a time-sensitive thing. Or as I said: one has to "identify the Gorilla before it is a gorilla". There's a dichotomy at work here however. Looking backwards at any company that IS a gorilla, there is a very clear track record of aggressive stock price appreciation. Which indicates a prolonged period of time in which the market "undervalued" the gorilla. However, what is not clear to me is whether the characteristics that made this destined-to-be-gorilla recognizeable were something that could be used prospectively. The issue in my mind isn't whether or not the data exist (clearly they do, Moore showed us the evidence), it's whether or not the data is distinguishable enough from false positives in order to lend itself as a determinant in an investing strategy. For example, while some folks early in this thread were busy looking for Gorilla genes in QCOM, they had already identified those same genes in ATHM. Oops. I think we are agreed that investing is predicated upon differential knowledge (or at least differential opinion, to give reasonable credit to serendipity). But I personally think it is stretching things too far to suggest that we can codify the degree of differential knowledge based on a qualitative estimation of whether or not a company is or is not a gorilla and therefore bias our investment decisions accordingly. Otherwise we risk frittering away our gains on SEBL and QCOM through our simultaneous losses in ATHM and EMC. For example. What do you think?