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.

Technology Stocks : Alphabet Inc. (Google) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Mary Cluney who wrote (7395)	2/12/2006 11:42:16 AM
From: dylan murphy	Respond to of 15857

Barrons...also known as Bearons... You are right. The average person doesn't always whats truth and whats BS in these type of articles. After paying taxes and commissions on a sale it easy to see why someone wouldn't be able to get back later. Esp if it goes higher. Cramer says on his show that no ever got hurt taking a profit. Thats not entirely true either. Long ago I also had some AOL. I sold for a small profit. Then watched as it lower short term before taking off for a huge gain. It's true the small profit didn't hurt me, but I hate to think how much I would have made simply by holding. I've been able to hold on to my QCOM making some small trades along the way. They are too big now for Barrons to make any difference. If we knew the future we would all be rich. I have no idea where GOOG will end up. Like Paul I try to keep it a small part of my portfolio. I suspect Goog will be be down hard early then who know...May even be green for the day.

To: Mary Cluney who wrote (7395)	2/12/2006 4:31:18 PM
From: Lizzie Tudor	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 15857

well, I read the barrons article this time, and it reminds me a lot of things I see from the S&P analyst Scott Kessler. I have a completely different read on the weakness in google lately than Barrons or Scott Kessler. Specifically in the area of competition, "increased competition" as Kessler likes to say, is really a clueless statement. Google has done nothing but gain share in the past year, and December was the coup de gras. Thats it for yahoo and especially MSN who is no longer. I don't know what makes Kessler and Barrons think these 2 are going to emerge as some sort of re-energized powerhouse. Even if they merge, which some think is possible, "Microshoo" will then be nothing but a hodgepodge of management styles, ie management by committee. What DID happen last quarter, which Barrons has not commented on, is the size of the total pie for internet ads was not as large as the analysts thought. MSN missed, YHOO missed and GOOG met, on the revenue side. This means the analysts overestimated the total size of the market which is not a great thing either. But Barrons doesn't talk about that, they only talk about "increased competition" from YHOO and MSN, even though yahoo just said "we're happy to be #2" and MSN totally capitulated and moved to content (along with AOL, CNET and every other me-too player). My guess is GOOG opens down maybe 5 pts and recovers.