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 : Tech Stock Options -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: AlienTech who wrote (27697)	11/2/1997 8:27:00 PM
From: j g cordes	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 58727

AT.. just got back on after a nice dinner and found among other posts here your 'being very very nervous about 0 hour.' You're kidding of course? What does an abstract notion of rolling another thousand years on a base 10 time keeping system have to do with anything? Are you nervous because so many others are superstitious and that might influence trading, or is it the millenium year 2000 problem that computers won't make the grade? Perhaps there's an asteroid or a year 2000 virus, or a design change on the Ford Taurus? Cheers Jim

To: AlienTech who wrote (27697)	11/2/1997 10:13:00 PM
From: Matthew B.	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 58727

<And if jesus cometh watch out.. Lots and lots of relegious folks the world over are going to be mighty nervous and want cash to withstand the floods> And when Jesus cometh, no-one will care about the Stock Market any more. There will be other things of more import on their minds. Matthew

To: AlienTech who wrote (27697)	11/2/1997 10:22:00 PM
From: Dwight E. Karlsen	Respond to of 58727

AT, re year 2000 >Lots and lots of relegious folks the world over are going to be mighty nervous and want cash to withstand the floods..< I've never heard such a thing before. I have heard the year 2000 as being bandied about (not real seriously) as a "logical" time for the end of the world; and the reasoning isn't relevant. To look at this closer though, consider: The majority of US citizens are Christian. That includes many diverse denominations, but the churches including Catholics & Protestants (the latter includes Lutheran , Baptist, Seventh Day Adventist, Episcopal, etc) are probably the largest "group". For this Catholic/Protestant group, the end of the world means just that: The end of the world; meaning the Earth will be consumed by fire. Surely nobody believing this way also believe they can take their money with them when they leave this Earth. As far as floods, etc., I think that's why most people carry standard insurance policies! -G- OTOH, there are religions which believe in "the Millenium" (a 1,000 year reign of Christ on Earth), such as Mormons, but I have doubts about there being enough people believing in the Millenium to cause major markets impact. I don't have any numbers in front of me, but it's not something I would plan my portfolio around. Also I have no idea whether Mormons will be moving into cash or not, just to make that clear. ;-) Perhaps you could do some checking around if you think it's going to be a major market event. DK

To: AlienTech who wrote (27697)	11/2/1997 10:33:00 PM
From: Tom Trader	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 58727

>>This is one of the things I was saying. Now would this be a good thing for the market or will it blow up on veryones faces<< I think that the market is better off achieving a more sustainable bottom--a rally from this level will IMO fail--though it amy be a tradeable rally. >>BTW tom, I was raised a catholic and I am not all that relegious, but even I am very very nervous as the 0 hour approaches and its going to be a LONNNG 99 and one of my planning is to start preparing for it by middle of 98... any thoughts on this? << I guess my view is closer to Jim's -- the year 2000 despite its millenium implications, will be just another year. Now the Y2K problem has more significant implications. I recently found that Schwab was applying a margin requirement to some calls that I sold against LEAPS that I own--same strike long and short. It took a while for them to figure out why this was happening--it turns out that I am long the 2000 LEAPS and the Schwab computers could not read it right and therefore required a margin on my short calls. Admittedly a minor problem but it brought home what people have been talking about. Good trading