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: Michael Burry who wrote (3138)	2/4/1998 9:13:00 PM
From: Scott Mc	Respond to of 78525

Mike, Re SFAM, it reminds me of the Malaysian market, up 25% the other day, thats like betting on red, who knows. I've worked in the tech field for 20 yrs, yet probably less than 10% of my port is in tech stocks, frankly I figure unless I deal directly with suppliers(which I don't) I'm in no position to judge them very well so Im back to Ken Fisher and PS/r. One tech that has moved for me lately is Unisys, bought 90% based on what I've learned from Superstocks(in my mind a classic example). Pls keep letting us know when you put your articles up on MSFT, I always make a point to read them and enjoy them. Scott

To: Michael Burry who wrote (3138)	2/4/1998 9:47:00 PM
From: Paul Senior	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 78525

Mike Burry: I agree with Scott in previous post. Primarily PSR ratios. I don't use expended R&D as percent of revenues which was also mentioned here earlier. I've read your latest article also; I like that it will cause me to go back and review some of my Graham material. If one is a value investor, why would one need or use a separate methodology to value tech? And additionally, there are still many good companies out there that can be evaluated and sell now at reasonable prices, no need to find something else, IMO.

To: Michael Burry who wrote (3138)	2/5/1998 12:49:00 AM
From: jeffbas	Respond to of 78525

I sympathize like crazy on SFAM. I have my own - DPMI. I did half my due diligence on the stock and bought a starter position at $26 last week, concluding it was probably mispriced. Now "what I don't know about the company isn't worth knowing", I still have my starter position, and the stock is $39. (It WAS mispriced, but fairly priced now.) I agree with the poster who said that traditional valuation measures should be used on tech stocks just like any others. In fact I have learned over the years that you should, if anything, be tougher. The reason is that the R&D spending is essential to these companies survival. However, the results of such spending in these dynamic businesses are not assured, which represents additional risk. Everyone looks at the homeruns, but forgets that any portfolio of tech stocks will have its share of Apple's and Novell's. Unfortunately, it is also true that a tech stock that looks like a value stock is often there for a serious reason, which may be difficult to solve. (It is more often true that traditional companies can have value pricing because of disinterest and neglect, and not have serious problems.) Paul Klemenic is the guru of ECM stocks and should be on anyone's list if they are interested in them.