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 (6702)	4/10/1998 10:54:00 AM
From: Pancho Villa	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 18691

>Anyone with 20/20 hindsight can now wish they were long YHOO, AOL, AMZN, and others.< You bet I had my YHOO short more than double up, My initial AOL short position also doubled up! All this in three months! there were not many better longs than these stocks. I remember my/our joke last fall regarding flight to quality into stocks with no perceived Asian exposure, I/we were kidding, well it happened! The market is, more than ever, looking only at the next quarter: Who is gonna make it, who is going to disappoint. >Why do we need to read about his "methodology" if we are marching to the beat of a different drum?< I think we should be open to all kinds of ideas. You know, the Zacks BS has worked in the past. As someone said this is about making money not about being three steps ahead of the market. This being said I think there is a great risk in trying to make money this way. The Mutual Fund grave yard is littered with stellar performers in one year that then crash the next. Pancho

To: clochard who wrote (6702)	4/10/1998 2:19:00 PM
From: Peter V	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 18691

Although this thread tends to be about fundamentals, at its core it's about making money, just as most SI threads are. Craig said to go long on YHOO, Roger said to short YHOO in his first post. Roger had (and still has) the fundamentals correct, but the short is a losing position for now. So why should we listen to Craig? Because doing so might have helped some people avoid shorting YHOO and losing money, or getting a margin call, etc. Not that Craig is always right, but neither are any of us here. (no offense Roger, I would have agreed with your decision to short YHOO on fundamentals in January) Shorters need to focus not just on the fundamentals, but the momentum of stocks and how they get that way. Whether Craig ignored the fundamentals is not the issue here, finding the stock's direction regardless of its fundamentals is the key for all of us, long or short. We make informed decisions by listening to many information sources, but in the end we are "gambling" by taking a chance that our analysis of a stock's direction is correct. Your methodology may not be identical to Craig's, but it doesn't mean that his methods are wrong and yours are right. Don't assume that we are all marching to the beat of any one particular drum. If anyone had a foolproof strategy to stock picking, they probably would not waste time on the threads ...

To: clochard who wrote (6702)	4/10/1998 5:40:00 PM
From: Gotham Guru	Respond to of 18691

<<Anyone with 20/20 hindsight can now wish they were long YHOO, AOL, AMZN, and others. One can only say that Craig was right, but he was lucky, not fundamentally right. This thread is about fundamentals, not gambling. Why do we need to read about his "methodology" if we are marching to the beat of a different drum?>> Not really, if all us shorts weren't short these issues, there would be less volatility and buyers IMO-it may have gone up but not like this-too many buyers were shorts giving up and covering Happy Easter to all Instigator

To: clochard who wrote (6702)	4/12/1998 5:46:00 PM
From: Lazlo Pierce	Respond to of 18691

Steve <<One can only say that Craig was right, but he was lucky, not fundamentally right.>> This is a VERY condescending remark. I personally could not move myself to buy these stocks at these levels, but the market is always RIGHT. To, after the fact, still be self-rightous, and say luck was the reason he's ahead, while some of us are behind, is nothing more than denial. That doesn't mean things may change and fast, but for this last run, these internet stocks (and others, i.e. KO) were longs, NOT shorts. Dave