To: Cynic 2005 who wrote (6803 ) 11/1/1997 9:59:00 AM From: Cynic 2005 Respond to of 18056
To all, the best of Alan Ableson's column this week (Don't worry about the CopyRight police, Dan. This is a quote only -g-)What do you call a 550-point drop in a single day? A start. And what do you call a 337-point rise on over a billion shares the very next day? A mistake. What do you call Thursday's 125-point dip? A buying opportunity -- if you're dippy. What do you call Friday's bounce? A command performance. The market was under strict orders to put on its best face when China's Red Chip Maximum Leader, Jiang Zemin, visited the Citadel of Capitalism, the New York Stock Exchange. What do you call a week like last week? Interesting. Another:We were also supposed to be mightily reassured by reports that the "little guy" was buying. But we can't figure out why we were supposed to be reassured. To begin with, we were completely unaware that brokers now routinely ask customers phoning in orders how tall they are. And, anyway, Wall Street's heralding the purported buying by the little guy on Monday as evidence of his sagacity, courage and cool didn't quite square with its traditional view of the little guy. Don't misunderstand us: Wall Street has always treasured the small investor. But not so much for his sagacity as for his gullibility, less for his courage than for his pliability and much more for his impetuosity than for his cool. The small investor has long been celebrated by the large wire houses, in particular, for his unfailing willingness to pay the highest commissions, his touching eagerness to act as receptacle for the tag ends of sticky new issues and his enthusiastic response to whatever new cockamamie "product" their marketing geniuses can dream up. Besides, it wasn't even true. Individuals did buy on Tuesday, piling into the Dells and Compaqs just in time to catch some tops before the stocks rolled over again. On Monday, however, the little guys were in there busily selling, just like the big guys.