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 : Value Investing -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Spekulatius who wrote (58144)	10/8/2016 2:15:27 AM
From: Jurgis Bekepuris	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 78701

I agree with Spek. If Gorillas and King's are to be discussed at length, people probably should read GG book. Or at least GG FAQ (one version here Message 14022237 ) for some kind of semblance of G&K definitions. Otherwise calling a random company Gorilla is just meaningless. I personally mostly agree with FAQ definitions. OTOH, these definitions mean that Gorillas are pretty much non-existent species. This was one of the downfalls of GG investing. Others were impatience to wait for 1-2 Gorillas per decade, buying of very tentative non-Gs (usually without any valuation work) and impatience to hold 1-2 existing Gorillas through rough patches. Kings are more prevalent. Partial Gorillas - companies missing some of the six Gorilla characteristics - are around too. Returning to IPGP, it has maybe 1 out of 6 Gorilla characteristics... Have fun.

To: Spekulatius who wrote (58144)	10/8/2016 8:09:08 AM
From: Graham Osborn	Respond to of 78701

Super helpful - thank God we have a physicist on the board! Of the general definition, clearly I underestimated the number of former gorilla hunters here and I will seek to remedy my naïveté this weekend.

To: Spekulatius who wrote (58144)	10/23/2016 12:00:38 PM
From: Graham Osborn	Respond to of 78701

I am a little way over half done with TFM and I can say that I have found it qualitatively useful for thinking about moats in high tech (with the caveat that their moat definition tends to revolve overmuch around MSFT and so may not be readily extrapolable). By the same token I can see how a population of pure-bred GG investors would tend to overvalue the Gorillas and undervalue Chimps/ Princes etc, to the extent such could be clearly defined. If one accepts there is a good price for everything, some second-level thinking along these lines might be profitable. For example, TWTR seems like a Chimp (FIT a Prince?) but when the market has already clobbered the Chimp TFM gives no prescription apart from apparently to keep beating a dead Chimp. I agree that IPGP is either a King or Prince depending on how the TAM is defined.