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 : NEXTEL -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Ed Pittman who wrote (3482)	12/6/1997 10:01:00 PM
From: Frederick Smart	Respond to of 10227

> There are a great number of smart people on this thread..> Thanks Ed, I couldn't agree more: all the "Smart" people on this thread that is.... As for "long term" investments, I consider "long-term" any holding which takes on a "core" position in my overall portfolio. Sometimes, core positions develop from the get go within a short period of time - ie. buy it, period. This doesn't happen too often. Nextel was one the type of stock where I did not just "buy it". I committed to the story early by putting my toe in the water at $10 3/8ths just after McCaw entered. Then I established what I consider to be a significant "core" position at $15 while additional positions have worked to only expand on an already healthy core - at $18 3/8, $23, 23 1/2 and $26 7/8. I will not trade Nextel - if I did then it wouldn't be "core" - with the exception of having some of my position called away from selling the Nov 20's as I was increasing my stake via PITC in the late going at a discount. I have three to four "core holdings" which comprise 80% of my equity investments. Outside of this I have 5-10 stocks which I have positions in which, over time, depending on the progress made and fundamentals, I will either add to or subtract from. I would take a huge change for any of these 5-10 to start eating away at the relative percentage of the four "core" holdings. Core long term holdings are like the golden eggs laid by the Golden Goose. The market is always there to tempt everyone out of these gems - these Microsofts, Intels, etc. It's hard enough to find the golden eggs, but for the vast majority of investors even harder to keep them. The world is littered with folks who "owned Microsoft at one time, but sold it..." Buffet's Geico is what made him the God that he is. Geico carried Buffet in the early days. That was his stake and he made damn sure he did not stray from this "core holding" long term investment philosophy.. Can you imagine if Buffet tried to trade in an out of Coke, Gillette or Cap Cities. What a tax nightmare. Each exit and reentry plays havoc on one's resolve to stay the course even if you were to get back in a stock. "Playing around" trying to trade, etc. is the quickest way to scratch/zero/negative return investing that I know of. But that's why there's a market out there - to tempt us out of our positions, make us second guess ourselves, etc. Investing long term isn't longterm if you lack the two critical elements missing from most investment plans: DISCIPLINE AND RESOLVE. Good luck! Othertimes, core positions establish themselves in stocks which I hold that consistently do well and who's fundamental story - increasing revenues, earnings, successful new products - gets stronger over time. The whole point of having a market - it's chief function - is to allow for ongoing entry/exit opportunities.