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: clochard who wrote (6695)	4/10/1998 10:19:00 AM
From: cellhigh	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 18691

unsound as it may seem..its little explosive stocks like this that should find their way into all of our portfolios in a responsible percentage..just in case were missing something thats not out on the table yet... that being said we are pretty far along now..

To: clochard who wrote (6695)	4/10/1998 10:25:00 AM
From: Pancho Villa	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 18691

I haven't read recent Craig's posts here at Roger's but have read some addressed to me in which difference of opinions on YHOO have been mentioned. I hope that things cool off and that he continues to post here as I value a smart contrarian opinion greatly. In the other hand, there are a few things I would like to point out to him and others, so I hope he reads this post. A bit of history, the first time I came across Craig was at the COMS thread, he was short the stock, I wish I had followed his advice, the stock at the time was trading in the high 30's range, I ended up selling most of it at 36+ when they missed the quarter and the stock didn't move much! Why didn't I give Craig's posts the attention I should have? My own answer to the question is that I perceived Craig as being a bit harsher than the average SI poster, that colored my view of his posts. I must admit that may lack of "giving proper attention to his posts" can be constructed as being my own fault. However, my humble opinion is that if he is really interested in helping the little folks at SI (as I think he is) being a bit more polite may make his posts more persuasive. However, it may be the case that he does not really care about how others perceive his posts! As far as I am concerned, I came to accept him the way he is. We frequently exchange public and private posts. It is difficult to change people. This being said, when it comes to Roger's thread, I always try [not always successfully] to remind myself about Roger's opening statement regarding civility: Ups! he forgot to mention this in the 98 thread! Roger: please talk ti Jill to see if you can change the first post! I have myself violated this rule in several occasions. I am tempted to use self-defense as an excuse where there is none. Thus I apologize for any harsh words I have used i my posts. I guess I cannot force anyone to abide by wishes of the person who started this thread, but I am willing to do my part setting an example. Pancho

To: clochard who wrote (6695)	4/10/1998 8:58:00 PM
From: Funda	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 18691

Forget Yahoo and look at AMD << YHOO is a ponzi scheme which will crash one day without warning, and Crawford needs to realize that the rest of us on this thread are not comfortable with a long position.>> Although Yahoo looks overvalued by conventional yardsticks, it is definitely not a "ponzi scheme". They have been the one Internet company that have been very focused about what they are doing and concentrated on being good at what they do. I mean most of us use the Yahoo financial page, because it is one of the better ones right? They have also been very good at exploiting the success of their site with schemes such as the Yahoo credit card etc. Now they are selling insurance, which sounds like a good idea. And they have growing revenue and growing earnings on their side. The point here isn't that nobody should make posts here from the perspective of being long. An argument for a long, if valid can save a short money and hence should be looked at on merit. Another thing I have seen over and over again is that overvaluation alone does not make a good short. As Roger pointed out in one of his posts, in this kind of a (bull) market, if you want to play short, broken stocks are our best bets. I think AMD is a good short right now - they have never delivered a profit for as far back as I can remember and they have failed Wall Street consensus estimates quite often. They are a laggard in the CPU market and have almost always been behind Intel, despite claims to the contrary. Even when they have appeared to have an advantage, they haven't been able to deliver. During the 486 to Pentium transition they hyped the K5, but it was hardly a success (revenue wise or technically). Today it's the same hype about the K6. I bet Intel wins this round again with the Pentium II. Plus AMD's fundamentals don't look too good. Definitely overvalued with no great prospects for the future IMO. Funda

To: clochard who wrote (6695)	4/14/1998 12:41:00 PM
From: craig crawford	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 18691

<< That's why Crawford's method is so wrong. How can anyone of sound mind invest in a so fundamentally unsound way? >> The market isn't about being "right". It's about making money. If you have to follow the mo-mo crowd to do it so be it. Go ahead and fight the trend for a while, eventually it will turn your way. There is more than one way to make money, and your method will eventually work for you. << A lot of them feel that they can make their fortune and get out, but it doesn't work that way for most because the same overwhelming greed and recklessness that got them in will keep them there until the morning of the abyss >> How do you know I won't get out in time? You make a lot of assumptions. If you get lucky and pick the right stocks (DELL, C$CO, MSFT, YHOO, etc) you will have so much profit that you can survive a wake up call one morning. On the other hand, shorting something and just riding it up can destroy you just as fast. Right about the time you can't take the pain anymore and your broker buys you in, the squeeze stops. Furthermore, how do you know I am reckless? I think I am a good enough trader that I don't need to bet it all on one stock and a crazy market. I am confident that I can repeat the process over and over again and I will be happy building my fortune slowly. << YHOO is a ponzi scheme which will crash one day without warning, and Crawford needs to realize that the rest of us on this thread are not comfortable with a long position. >> I don't have a problem with people who short YHOO. YHOO is closer to a top than a bottom. (For the time being. Long-term in can go plenty higher). I just thought it was a little silly to insult the longs while the stock was going up 30 points a week.