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 : THQ,Inc. (THQI) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Todd D. Wiener who wrote (6443)	6/26/1998 4:47:00 PM
From: Jim Willie CB	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 14266

Todd, My comment on <<splits of 2/1 indicating mgmt expectation of 100% earnings growth in 10-18 months>> stands. You move from THQ (small cap, microcap?) to godzilla cap in your attempt to make my comment seem foolish. Coke, Disney, Exxon are companies each with at least, what $50 billion in sales, maybe 400-700 times THQ sales. Try citing some examples of companies under $500m in size. I realize you are on top of the scene. But lets compare apples with apples, not toads with wooly mammoths. In the process you look silly moving from extreme to extreme on the equity landscape. Woodland, Some reasons to remain short, or add to losing short positions 1) believing you are smarter than stockholders & market 2) listening to profoundly misguided and stupid people 3) living in some arrogant ivory tower 4) having next to zero knowledge of the industry 5) being out of touch with the world of fun 6) being emotionally involved with the position 7) believing history (price chart) must repeat itself 8) believing great companies dont reap rewards 9) being a proud fool jackass, unwilling to admit failure 10) see reason #1 Cover your nuts before some squirrels chomp on them from a much higher tree. / Jim Willie

To: Todd D. Wiener who wrote (6443)	6/26/1998 5:52:00 PM
From: Kelvin Taylor	Respond to of 14266

To all: Here's a new quote site I found recently with 100 FREE real time daily quotes and intraday charts. www4.quotecentral.com I find the chart easy to read and the quote info includes total volume plus volume for the last executed trade. The site also includes a comprehensive company report with an historical price chart for the the past 5 years. rapidresearch.com You do have to register to view the quotes, but its free. Kelvin P.S. NOTE: A Java enabled browser is required to use the historical price chart.

To: Todd D. Wiener who wrote (6443)	6/26/1998 10:22:00 PM
From: JoCo	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 14266

Todd: Thanks for all the great insight. I'm mostly an admirer from afar rather than an active participant due to time. Interested in your opinion on Bear Stearns coverage, which has been widely rumored on the MF board (not entirely without basis since some of the guys at E3 saw Bear at THQ's location). It would seem to me that Bear Stearns is an awfully big firm to be covering a microcap such as THQ. However, Bears current interest could lie in an investment banking relationship that could take THQ to "the next level". I have become convinced that the THQ management team could probably successfully run almost any company in its field (perhaps except EA) so maybe an acquisition of a larger competitor is not out of the question. Acquisition of franchise titles that could be PROFITABLY marketed and converted to multiple platforms (current and future, thanks to GameFX acquisition) would be an interesting challenge for Brian and company. This is stretching the envelope a bit but Brian supposedly has a bunch of deals on his desk, so perhaps he will pull a rabbit out of his hat; he may even be loaded for Bear ;). Any thoughts on this type of direction for THQ? Interested in your thoughts.

To: Todd D. Wiener who wrote (6443)	6/29/1998 1:21:00 AM
From: Marc Newman	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 14266

Todd, thanks for the chart. I was looking more for some play-by-play from some of the fine writers on the thread. You know, about how the longs stormed over the gunwales and the shorts sank beneath the oil-black waters, never to be seen again. That sort of thing. In terms of the small cap discussion, this was on TSC last week: thestreet.com It's a quant article showing that the reason why big mutual funds can't play in the small cap arena is the high transaction costs. Essentially big money moves a small, illiquid stock too much. But hey, for those of us with under $3 million, we're set. :) I don't think it is a question of sticking with small caps to try to get some kind of historical 2% outperformance over big caps. It's a question of following your method of finding the handful of companies that are great bets and trying to hit some homers. An excerpt from the piece: BARRA notes that any measure of trading cost will be greatly underestimated because of the tendency of portfolio managers to submit trades in a realistic fashion. Portfolio managers want their trades to be filled, so most large orders are naturally for large-cap, liquid names. The opportunity costs associated with such self-censorship are substantial. Investors managing less than $3 million in assets, on the other hand, can establish a meaningful investment position in small, illiquid names relatively quickly. Why do individual investors focus on smaller stocks than the pros? Because they can. A model developed recently by DLJ adds an interesting and useful twist to the measurement of market impact by splitting the cost into two portions -- the direct impact from the trade and an implied cost associated with the time the trade takes to complete. In a study of billions of dollars of transactions, DLJ found that the timing cost was six times more significant than the direct market impact cost. Specifically, the cost of commissions plus direct market impact was $0.05 per share, while the cost of delay in filling the order was $0.30 per share. I see this as an exciting finding, because it highlights the advantage enjoyed by individual investors in regards to overall trading costs. Because of the integration of the small order execution system (SOES) into the online brokerage trading mechanism, individual investors can usually get a transaction filled promptly at the asking price. This cuts out the timing cost, which according to DLJ is 85% of the total trading cost. Put another way, individual investors enjoy a 7-to-1 advantage in trading costs by managing their own account rather than pooling their money in a mutual fund.