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 : Cisco Systems, Inc. (CSCO) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: John Koligman who wrote (74865)	1/16/2008 11:10:31 PM
From: Lizzie Tudor	Respond to of 77399

if you're going to B&H it has to be a real growth name like AAPL or FSLR. In those names its hard to beat a B&H strategy and it would seem like CSCO might be able to do that just looking at their fundies and the strength of the market they sell into but so far nada. Maybe there is too much overhead in cisco I don't know. B&H is ok though.

To: John Koligman who wrote (74865)	1/17/2008 8:49:59 AM
From: RetiredNow	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 77399

I've looked at alot of statistical data on traders in my life and the statistics show that only 1% of traders consistently beat the market. The other 99% under perform the market and under perform the LTBH strategy. So if you are in that 1%, more power to you. I feel pretty good about my choices, as my portfolio consistently earns market returns. That's better than 75% of individual investors out there. It's funny how the day traders come out of the woodwork whenever the economic cycle moves downwards. It's like day traders use the economic lull as proof that their strategies work. Not very logical. LTBH's are buying right now while the rest of the market is panicking. That means that people like me are getting stocks on firesales and will continue to do so. Statistics show that LTBHs made back all there money and were in the black only 5 years after the Crash of '29. Day traders and people who panicked took 20 years to recoup their losses. That was also the case for me after the bad years of 2001 and 2002. By mid-2004, my portfolio was worth more than it was worth at the peak of 2000. The difference is that LTBHs continued to dollar cost average into their portfolio, with periodic rebalancing and risk appropriate investment. They do this in good times and bad, and on average they buy in at good prices. Over the long term, the statistics show that LTBH is the strategy with the highest probability of success for the individual investor. You can go against those odds and still win, but then you are just gambling. I personally won't risk the savings I've accumulated over a lifetime of my blood, sweat, and tears on a gamble.