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 : Roger's 1997 Short Picks -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: CalculatedRisk who wrote (7976)	12/8/1997 12:56:00 AM
From: Pancho Villa	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 9285

Hi CR, on ALYD, I fully agree with your view. I made a mistake on my choice of words. The folks at ALYD may not be trying to scam anyone, investors are doing it to themselves. When I studied the stock, I came to a conclusion close to yours: i.e., one of the best y2k shorts around). I realized my mistake in choice of words but why bother to rectify after some not too polity words from the longs. I will post again there once the stock falls under 10 (let's see how long it takes before I post again). Will try to find ALYD [to short]again on monday. I did not find any Friday, I did find some about 2-3weeks ago and shorted at 137/8. I am not worried at all about the run up. Wonder if some manipulation went on while still on BB (you know the so called mob buying/selling repeated times among themselves, or just ALYD lovers who cannpt tell a balance sheet from an income/CF statement). >>RE: Long/short/cash mix. You reported something like 97% long, 3% cash, 66% short. This is confusing to me. I have always looked at my account as (Long + Cash - Short) = 100%. An example would be: 70% Long, 50% Cash, 20% short. 70% + 50% - 20% = 100%! Perhaps you could clarify.<< Assume my portfolio was worth $100 and I did not have any shorts, 97% longs and 3% cash. then my portfolio would be worth $100, 97% long. I have used my $100 to borrow shares to short on an amount aquivalent to 66% of my net liquid worth. Thus I am still worth $100. but my net equity (i.e., market exposure is 97%long-66%short=31%) The difference is that for you long+short-cash=100. For me 100 indicates my net liquid worth (i.e, long + cash = 100 Of course, if I were using margin cash would be negative and long would be greater than 100%). IMO my way of reporting things gives the interested reader a better idea of how far I am leveraged. for example, 120%long, 50% short would mean I am borrowing 20% of my net worth to leverage my long position. I think the difference in our approach is that Fidelity does not give me the cash from the short sale while Shawb gives it to you. Since they lend me the shares and charge me no comission when I sale short [I pay comission only when I cover] I never see the cash. However on Fridays they mark to market (i.e., credit my account with cash if my shorts went down, take cash from my account if my shorts went up) Hope this clarifies Pancho