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.

Politics : View from the Center and Left -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Sr K who wrote (70828)	6/5/2008 9:32:21 AM
From: Mary Cluney	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 542940

<<<Would you apply your criteria to stock analysts? If they are slick talkers, don't believe them? Are all analysts who communicate well not to be believed?>>> We frequently draw inferences from appearances, but there are times when appearances are misleading. Slicksters, con men, and assorted knaves spend all their time polishing the appearance and totally neglect the substance. There are however, people who can put it all together. They can know what they are talking about and also look good talking about it. I think Obama is young and inexperienced but is on his way to putting it all together. However, I don't think he is there just yet but I believe he will get there.

To: Sr K who wrote (70828)	6/5/2008 3:02:05 PM
From: Bridge Player	Respond to of 542940

True, all slick talkers are not con men. Some of them are honest. Just like all muddled talkers are not stupid. Some of them are smart and honest. But re: analysts. [I'll admit that even some of them are honest.] I'll give you 3 examples of the things that bug me the most. 1. A stock trades around 40, up from 30 recently. An analyst has a buy rating in the stock with a target of 45. The stock now starts to slide because of some negative fundamentals and the stock goes all the way to 8 during the next year.The analyst now revises his rating to hold with a new target of 6. 2. A stock trades at 450 up from the 200s. An analyst has a buy rating with a 1-year target of 480. The stock gets popular with the institutions and runs to 540 on momentum, no change in fundamentals. The analyst now puts on a new price target of 600. Can't have a stock with a buy selling below our target, now can we? 3. A stock with a 20-point 1 yr trading range is selling at 32. An analyst with a hold rating has a target of 31. On no news and no price change in the stock, the analyst now keeps the hold rating but changes the 1-yr target to 29. $2 bucks. Like God he now thinks it's going to end the next 12 months at 29 instead of 31. Sorry for the off-topic rant but half these guys couldn't brush their teeth and they're pulling down 500K.