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 : Amazon.com, Inc. (AMZN) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Glenn D. Rudolph who wrote (13829)	8/17/1998 5:13:00 PM
From: Bill Harmond	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 164684

The market is about supply and demand. Price levels in themselves don't have anything to do with ethics. Buying an expensive stock is no less ethical than buying an expensive piece of real estate, or a rare car. Was it unethical to buy AOL for $5 four years ago (probably as expensive on earnings as Amazon today), or Yahoo for $30 last year? Was it unethical for someone to sell Amazon for $147? Was it unethical for me to sell Amazon for 130, then buy it back at 121? Ethics deals with the inherently good and bad and with moral duty. Buying or selling a stock is outside the realm of ethics. You shorting a stock to some long doesn't qualify as unethical either. Caveat emptor...buyer beware. It's unethical to lie, or to steal, or to misguide someone you have a duty towards. If an analyst or company hides or misrepresents truth that he is duty-bound to reveal, then that is unethical. It's not unethical for Amazon to keep their business plans secret, or for them to become efficient enough to put mom and pop bookstores out of business.

To: Glenn D. Rudolph who wrote (13829)	8/17/1998 5:15:00 PM
From: zax	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 164684

Does the stock market have to be unethical? As long as unethical people have influence over concentrated, large amounts of money, and follow the leads of other unethical people, I am afraid so. Perhaps the information age will change this, too. -- Eric

To: Glenn D. Rudolph who wrote (13829)	8/17/1998 5:27:00 PM
From: trouthead	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 164684

I wouldn't say that buying it shows a lack of ethics. Maybe a lack of fear. But those that are hyping it are possibly not behaving ethically. This is a very risky play. Anyone telling others to buy at these levels should be informing the buyer that the risk reward ratio is very high. If they are and the buyers buys anyways the buyer is responsible. Even if they are not being advised clearly the buyer is still responsible for his or her actions, though there may be some culpability to the adviser. But glenn, we live in a capitalist society. Caveat Emptor rules the Diem. jb