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: jeffbas who wrote (19661)	9/8/2004 11:28:51 AM
From: sjemmeri	Respond to of 78741

Thanks for the update on IIG. I've corrected for that and also reduced HLSH to 1 share in the couble portfolio as a placeholder. The total cost vs. value has always been off a bit because I can't get a quote for HLSH on SI. These changes show the porfolio now with a loss of 1.6 % ytd. If SI had a quote on HLSH, it would be up couple hundred also - making the portfolio pretty close to even on the year. BTW, I've only ever updated the safe portfolio for ACAS dividends - certainly the overall return should be a little higher than shown. As for Madharry's comment: at some point, I decided (with a little feedback from the board) to just track the stocks without making portfolio changes. Certainly, one could have made excellent trading profits in a lot of the double stocks as many were up 50 % to 100 % (and some of use did successfully book some of those profits). My conclusion if the double goal was to identify low-price stocks that might have the possibility of outsized short-term trading gains, we were successful. Maybe purely by accident - maybe we could collectively do it again. If the goal was to identify such outrageous values that the market would eventually appreciate such stocks in the long (or at least intermediate) term, we're struggling.