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.

Politics : Ask Michael Burke -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Mike M2 who wrote (29427)	6/29/1998 11:47:00 AM
From: Knighty Tin	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 132070

Mike, Eps depends upon which set of stats you use. It was a lousy first half, even with the phoniest of the numbers. Gabelli is a smart guy and I do own his convertible securities fund. But his value approach is too rigid to do well in all market environments and you rarely see any of his funds on the best or worst performers list for any period. I think that is a bad statistic. Fidelity, on the other hand, has some awful funds, but they have some that are always on the best and worst lists for almost any period you can name. They basically treat their customers as though they are the investment pros and then just shoot for the moon with whatever style these "pros" choose. And, since they cover the waterfront, they are always in the right and wrong parts of the market. I think the Gabelli approach is intellectually more honest, but guess which approach makes more money for the fund managers? <G> Not surprisingly, I prefer the more flexible funds where the pros are the guys who have been managing money for awhile. There are almost no flexible, truly managed, funds left. MB