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 : Qualcomm Incorporated (QCOM) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Jon Koplik who wrote (13209)	8/2/1998 1:22:00 AM
From: Maurice Winn	Respond to of 152472

Jon, thanks for clearing up the derivatives question chewing at me = 'there is no answer'. [See the last paragraph] Scary! *Graduation Day* Thanks MikeD for giving me a passing grade. I'll supply my own sheepskin! The 'But' didn't worry me. I solve the cocktail party problem by buying cheap and going to a wave function at Piha or the movies instead. So I never have to explain 30 point drops. Sometimes I have to explain why I didn't sell at a high, or why $63 is really $80. But that's okay. Not the sweat generated by outright paper losses. Also, unlike Gregg, I don't have investors breathing down my neck wondering why they didn't put their hard earned dough into the mutual fund backing Yahoo!, Excite, Nikkei at 38000 in 1989. That must be some pressure. My investing principle goes like this; buy Q.com at $18, buy some more when it crashed to $32, and when it crashed to $42, and when it crashed to $52. Using cloned dough borrowed at 7.25% for the 32, 42 and 52 items. I find it more pleasant to ride out the peaks than the troughs, so I handle the troughs by helping to fill them in with more clones, which are loaned to me by the panicking people who sell at 52 because they heard that Korea had vanished and The Q was going to take a pasting. Now, the long run. True enough, we want to have a bit of fun now, not 40 years later, but the peaks and troughs are much shorter than that. 5 years is the long run for the Wall Street/Main Street cycle to play out. With 3 years more common. And even 1 year covering most roller coaster movements. So there isn't too much patience needed. Though asking a day trader to wait 30 minutes, let alone 2 years would demonstrate a different attitude to patience. The question I still have chewing at me, never figured out, is when there is a credit crunch and the musical chairs music stops, how many people are left standing? I'm convinced there'll be a printing like you wouldn't believe, so I'll be there to collect my share of the printing profits by having some debts to be devalued. But still there'll be a pasting of financial asset values. Do you think the market clearing costs of job redeployment, asset sales and legal delays would cause a more rapid and deeper collapse in these fast acting times so it might be like falling through thin ice? I really haven't got this one figured out other than the attempted rescue by rapid printing of SuperDs. Japan, Korea and NZ in 1987 are a guide and it is certainly messy! Meanwhile, I'll mosey over to LSI, whatever that is, and see whether I should point a bone at it! Thanks for your ideas on being dismal. Mqurice