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 : Roger's 1998 Short Picks -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Druss who wrote (4583)	3/9/1998 8:29:00 PM
From: Pancho Villa	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 18691

>The problem is exactly as some of the mocking longs have stated, they are canny and market savvy. They therefore read a stock as way overvalued or a company as being in trouble long before the general market does. In a manic overblown market such as this one shorts not only have to wait they have to cover or eat big paper losses.< Good post! Pancho

To: Druss who wrote (4583)	3/9/1998 9:47:00 PM
From: CalculatedRisk	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 18691

Druss, great post! "Shorts initiate positions too soon." Being early is not so devastating on the long side. As an example, IMO the semiconductor capital equipment companies (AMAT, et. al.) will see explosive growth in the near future as the transition to 300 mm wafers starts in earnest. If this analysis is correct, then investing in these companies will be very rewarding over the next few years. OTOH, when we find ourselves saying: "That will never payoff", like with AMZN ... we may be correct ... but how soon will others agree? Its an old market clich‚ ... the stock market is like a beauty contest ... but the goal is not to pick the winner, but to pick who everyone else thinks the winner will be! Like many on this thread, I ignore this "wisdom" and try to guess the eventual winners (or losers) and profit in the long term. My short positions are minimal right now ... maybe this should be considered a contrary indicator<g>. Best Regards, Bill