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 : Stock Swap -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Andrew Vance who wrote (10357)	12/16/1997 12:57:00 AM
From: Andrew Vance	Read Replies (4) \| Respond to of 17305

AV--I just got interrupted with a phone call that urged me to look at a late breaking commentary. So FWIW: * MARKET NEWS: Wall Street Monday belonged to bargain hunters, who first rescued blue chips from last week's severe slump, then turned to the technology sector to pick some values in the last hour of trading. The Dow Jones industrial average rose 84 points to close at 7922. On the New York Stock Exchange advances led declines, 16-to-14, as 603 million shares changed hands. The Nasdaq Composite finished virtually unchanged at 1537, after shedding more than 20 points earlier in the day. But analysts warned the worst might not be over for the technology sector. The worst may not be over but there is money to be made by playing the rolller coaster as opportunities arise. all you need is a swing of 10-20% which some of these are doing INTRADAY at times. Almost like playing a good Index Option, right Patrick??? Andrew BTW-an interesting comment by a newsletter source: Hype, as used on the internet, means that you either: 1--don't own a stock going up 2-- did not hold the stock when it went up 3-- have just shorted it while it is rising 4-- held a stock while it went down and then sold it just before it rebounded 5-- disagree with either an amatuer or professional analysis or opinion of the company, its prospects, or targets it has been given 6--have lost on some other stock, and therefore distrust everything from the source of that idea 7--disbelieve company statements, press releases 8--have uncovered material information that could be misleading, or has not been acknowledged or properly addressed by followers and analysts of the company, which has lead to inflated company prospects, but you are too lazy to state your case in a well-considered, helpful format 9--know something or think you know something about who is supporting the stock and why, but either cannot prove it or won't take responsibility or the time to state your case in a professional manner 10--like to call everything hype, and then, when something turns out to be, be able to say "I told you so" 11--you think something is wrong somewhere, but can't put your finger on it I think the view is very slanted in one direction by the author of this list of defintions. To me, hype is what happened to IDID, SPCL, GYMM and a host of other stocks when newsletter, market maker, paid publicists, or criminals go out and run a stock up to unrealistic levels when they have positioned themselves at a very low price. Hype is when a boiler room operation has a client wanting to sell a huge block of stock (restricted and unrestricted) or they have taken a huge position in the stock at a severe discount (See Chop Stock article in Business Week) and put the hard sell on only because they want to unload the stock to unsuspecting buyers. To be fair, part of the commentary also included: Or, does Investors Business Daily and CNBC 'hype' when they feature, as they presently are doing, the CEO of MRVC, one of Waaco's 'picks', as their spokesperson? Or was it 'hype' when DLJ and other analysts were 'promoting' (saying nice things about?) FINE, the fully-listed NASD company that dropped like a rock last week and was halted today? Or were these learned and respected professionals doing just as Waaco's amateurs have done in the past --- tried their damnedness to ferret out the available information from the company itself and then get caught with their pants down when that information now turns out to be inaccurate, maybe even deliberately deceptive. Isn't it time to perhaps turn attention to the source -- the company itself -- rather than killing off all the messengers with a blanket 'hype' pronunciation? Yes it is, but if you check your sources or go to external "respectable" sources like suppliers or customers, you get a better feel for what is going on. If you were buying a used car from me, you would never take my word for it that it ran like a dream. You would test drive the car and take it to your favorite mechanic or ask for the maintenance records on the car and where you had it serviced. In the same light, asking the CEO or the CFO how the company is doing is not really thinking straight. First there are legal and ethical issues. Second, they are more biased then anyone else. Ask their customers and suppliers how they are doing and how their new orders are stacking up against last year's shipments. Getting information from company executives is a very small part of my investigation process. Talking to the "in the trenches people" give me a better view of reality. Andrew