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 : GTIS - Will it be a Phoenix or not ? -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Scott Miller who wrote (1595)	3/2/1998 5:59:00 PM
From: RJC2006	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 2319

<<<Cannot say, due to our agreement. Perhaps this info is included in the annual report.>>> Once again...how did I know this would be your answer. <<<As a rule, I never buy stock when it's near its high>>> I always love reading this. As if anyone would believe that anyone would buy a stock near its high. <<<unless using dollar cost averaging methods, which is how I purchase mutual funds, too. I believe that stocks have a much easier time regaining lost ground than hitting new highs.>> Tsk, tsk...another example of advice fit for a retard. You don't dollar cost average on stocks. That can only work if you can buy a diversified portfolio in large block buys. If you can't then dollar cost averaging's profit could very well be eaten up by the commissions. Mutual funds work well for dollar cost averaging because of a lack of expense involved in their purchase. I am shocked that you didn't give more thought about your statement before you posted this supposition. <<< For example, when AOL lost a huge percentage of its value over a year ago, that was a perfect buy situation, especially since AOL is far more focused than its only real competitor, the Microsoft Network (MSN).>>> It's getting rather tiresome to have to continually poke holes in your contentions. AOL and MSN are about as close as two companies can come to being identical. They both sell internet access, email and content. AOL lost it's behind when they decided to bilk people through huge online charges. They paid the price for this when the LISPs offered $14-$20 a month unlimited internet access. AOL followed suit until they could gather enough lambs to the slaughter with their $19 a month deal which they did. But few investors knew whether or not AOL could recover so buying in at the "low" was impossible. No one knows how low a stock can go...er...uh except for Scott Miller that is. So far "Scott" all you have advised people to do is look into their crystal ball. <<This isn't a sure-fire system, of course--I wouldn't touch Netscape now, because Microsoft has an unfair advantage in that category that overcomes Microsoft's over-diversification problem. (That unfair advantage, of course, is that it owns the monopoly known as Windows.)>> Well I will leave it at this: Windows does not qualify as a monopoly. The Justice Department itself has already determined this. It's really discouraging that a hot shot like yourself doesn't recognize this fact. But I won't say anything more about it as I am running out of salt for your wounds.