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.

Politics : Idea Of The Day -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Nancy who wrote (15865)	12/21/1997 2:29:00 PM
From: Tom Trader	Respond to of 50167

>>I have forward to Judy and ask her to forward to you, some discussions on new high, new low indicators - it has turned the most bearish this week since march of 94. Also the daily new lows have been above 40 pretty much since Nov. >> I need to see how well this indicator has worked over a long period of time--not doubting what you say, but unless this indicator is predictive in relation to several down-turns it would not be sufficiently reliable given my approach to testing indicators/systems. >>If you read this week's Barron, there is a good discussion on HMO, why they will stay, and why they will not make money - thus not necessary good investment even they are washed out.<< I will check it out -- but the national media have written off sectors at various times -- and they are ALWAYS wrong. I am sure that they will be wrong when it comes to the HMOs' as well. I will say that the time is not ripe to buy the HMOs yet -- but we will get there, probably after a couple of other companies pre-warn. >>I believe niche like GHV will do far better than broad based HMO's. If you like GHV then look at THC for entry at about 26+. Now that COL is having problems, it gives THC a competitive advantage. >>Need to think thru the strategy but if we might be in a repeat of 1994 we need to rethink of taking LT position ...<< Now you are sounding like OJ:) Seriously though, the market could be vulnerable to a significant decline and that is why I keep emphasizing the need for protection to the down-side. The other alternative is to stand aside -- the risk one runs is that if the market stabilizes one could end up missing out on good entry points. I am a risk-taker--and I have a longer term perspective--and so am less bothered by potential declines if initial entry is at the right price and one is protected on the down-side. It has paid off for me in spades over the years--so I have no hesitation in doing so. Remember that I was the one on the TSO thread who kept telling Judy and others that I would not take investment positions at the ridiculous levels that prevailed a few months ago. But only do what you are comfortable with; Barton Biggs was quoted as advising people to sell to the point where they can sleep in comfort. I will buy to the point that I can sleep in comfort.