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 : Micron Only Forum -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Kerry Phineas who wrote (29040)	2/26/1998 2:24:00 PM
From: DavidG	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 53903

Kerry, I am not sure from your post what you are trying to say, but I'll comment as follows: David, in defense of the "Forever Bears" (I'm a temporary "Forever Bear", while I own a small January '99 position in puts and a small April position): I don't think they think MU follows fundamentals at all in the short term, so movements like this one wouldn't be too surprising to them. I did not think of you as a "forever bear" for the following reasons: 1) Forever Bears take all MU news as negative...whether it is very good for MU or not...anything bullish is a misprint, distorted, manipulated, generated by crooked management, old news, has no source, not as good as Koreans or Taiwanese, impossible, etc. 2) Most important fundamentals are net costs, gross costs, any costs other than what everybody else talks about such as Manufacturing cost. They use numbers that only they understand and can not be compared with any other company or news article. 3) Other important fundamentals are earnings...last years, this years, next years, last quarters, this quarters, next quarters, sometimes down to the penny. They never compare earnings with other companies in their sector to determine if MU is best, worst, other. They must refute vehemently any suggestion that MU is a low cost producer, let alone the low cost producer...why I don't know, but they are always in denial. 4) They will harass and intimidate any person who comes up with a suggestion of bullish overtone and if you respond, large numbers come out to attack. 5) They seem to be more short term than I think you are. Their shorts and PUTs are less than 3 month plays and with PUTS some buy out-of money PUTs expecting disaster within weeks... with maybe a call from an analyst in their favor. I don't believe all "forever bears" have all characteristics above but certainly most. It goes on and on I just got tired of typing.:-) Good Luck Trading DavidG

To: Kerry Phineas who wrote (29040)	2/26/1998 2:57:00 PM
From: DavidG	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 53903

Kerry, So much depends on other factors: the semiconductors in general, other tech stocks like MSFT, interest rates, conditions in Korea and Japan, IMF, etc., that no one really knows whats going to happen from month to month from either a technical or fundamental perspective. It seems likely to me that MU is going to have significant fundamental problems, but I'm no expert. In this stock, minute to minute is easier than day to day, which is easier than week to week, etc. I tend to disagree with you. I believe longer term fundamentals should be able to tell you where a stock is moving from its present point...and if it doesn't do what one has expected than maybe its being viewed incorrectly, or maybe not all the facts are available to do a complete analysis. Myself I believe it is very difficult to obtain all the fundamentals and no matter how much I read and analyze I feel very insecure with its completeness. We must all recognize our limitations. Fundamentals certainly have its place in selecting a stock for long term investments... but I believe it has much less importance when trading a stock or in your case shorting a stock. The fundamentals or lack thereof does not necessarily mean a stock should go down in the same way that very good fundamentals mean that stocks should go up and the rate at which it will appreciate. I believe this is probably the biggest trap that most bears are falling into on this thread. DavidG

To: Kerry Phineas who wrote (29040)	2/26/1998 3:56:00 PM
From: DavidG	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 53903

Kerry, However, here's a quote from one DavidG:<< I agree. 32 3/4 to 33 is a resistance band. I don't believe MU will go over 33. >> You were wrong, but of course wrong and long so you made some good money. (A pyrrhic victory, if you're worried about your rep. as a forecaster and not your bank account.) I believe you misunderstood my opinion of the 33 level. 33 is a point where, when MU is below it, it is more probable to bounce off it rather than go through it...and the probability of that happening is very high. So once I establish support and resistance points I stick with it rather than second guess it. I never look at it as wrong for MU to break support or resistance since there is always that probability it will occur but rather an opportunity to quickly react to it. It is too complicated for me to explain right now ...but certainly the more it recognizes support/resistance levels the higher the probability will be that it follows these rules. As far as me being long at that time and making a lot of money, that wasn't correct. I only had PUTS and only until MU broke support did I go long at 33 5/16 and sold out at above 34. Today I was long at 33 3/4 to 34 3/4. I miss tops and bottoms but do get the trades in between. Also, I do not recommend what other people should do, but rather just say what I am doing...and quite frankly it is only a fraction of all of my trades. So when you allude to a "pyrrhic victory", it is rather unfair, since I share my information and if one wants to follow, fine... and if they did everything that I have posted they may have more gains than losses...I know b/c I have them. In any event, I am not doing it to gain a rep, many have emailed me to continue posting trades, maybe b/c they are curious, or want to learn something different and compare it to what they are currently doing. Good Luck Trading DavidG