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 : Formerly About Applied Materials -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Teri Skogerboe who wrote (22104)	7/23/1998 11:14:00 PM
From: Joe S Pack	Respond to of 70976

Thread, Does any body has an answer for this simple question? How long typical funds hold a position that is either flat or in downward biased in comparison with an average individual investor? Is there a link to give a decent answer this question? Usually a fund manager's bonus is tied to his/her gain and often I find a typical fund's turn-over ratio is around 20% (I think on quarterly basis?). Given that, how long will they be willing to hold if AMAT does not make money for another couple of quarters? Can AMAT pull this kind of quarterly performance for another 5 months? If so won't they dump this stock to realize year lose and as part of window dressing? How much long other institutional holders wait? -Karun

To: Teri Skogerboe who wrote (22104)	7/24/1998 2:11:00 AM
From: Big Bucks	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 70976

Teri, Bravo, your argument makes sense to me even if the market doesn't. At some point, someone is going to have to "Pay the Piper" (remember the Pied Piper childrens story?) for the over-valuation of many pricey stocks with unsupported fundamentals. This market has no basis, IMO. The smart investors will skim the cream off the top and depart, those that hold will be the losers in the long run. Once the mania is gone and the funds/institutional investors divest their holdings all that will be left is the empty shell and bewildered investors. There has to be a VALUE association to make a company have any substantial worth. The internet stocks have fueled this latest rally, when they reach critical mass there will be a market implosion. I can't believe that anyone will hold many of the over-inflated stocks trading at 30+ earnings for very long if the value isn't there to support the price. Case in point, look at what happened to AMAT last year when it reached $108, the value wasn't there and it corrected as investors took the quick profits from the run up. The same will happen with the internet stocks and the semi's that can't support the fundamentals, IMO. Today the market vented a little steam, this was a good thing, but it is still way over pressurized, if it doesn't release more there will be a real ugly correction of "biblical" proportions in the not to distant future. Just my opinion, BB

To: Teri Skogerboe who wrote (22104)	7/24/1998 11:17:00 AM
From: Gottfried	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 70976

Teri, in response to your note to jtech/all... About your beliefs: >>I believe in "history", and that it tends to repeat itself < >>We are constantly on the look-out for the last problem, even if the current problem is entirely different. << Can you believe in these two statements at the same time? About Yardeni: You said... >> Yardeni has upped his probability of a severe global recession in '99 (including the U.S.) from 60% to 70%. This prognostication was in Barron's, dated 06 Jul 98 and his basis for this is not Y2K problems alone. << from Smart Money "Pundit Watch"... >>Other long-term picks: The long-term bond yield should fall to 5% by the end of 1998 and the Dow should hit 10,000 by the year 2000. With the way the market has been climbing this year, it was wise of Yardeni to add "or sooner." << Maybe Ed has changed his mind on DOW 10,000 by 2000. If he hasn't we have little to worry about. The Yardeni pundit watch is at... smartmoney.com I don't think the Market has ever been totally rational and never will be. Gottfried