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 : SAP A.G. -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Sam Citron who wrote (2492)	9/9/1998 12:49:00 PM
From: Ibexx	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 3424

Sam, OTOTOT I remember you are a big fan of CIEN. What do you think of the situation? Ibexx

To: Sam Citron who wrote (2492)	9/9/1998 1:09:00 PM
From: mauser96	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 3424

OTOT...Sam... Very lucid well thought out post. I think professional MM trying to move billions of dollars are unlikely to beat the averages because of limitations on their ability to react to the market, and because their own buying or selling is enough to change the prices. I know if I managed a $10 billion fund,I would closet index 90% of the fund, and maybe play with 10%. Today smaller investors may actually have an edge, and there are probably quite a few SI contributors that consistently beat the S&P 500. While I can't really disagree with anything in the post, I do think that the stock market is progressively becoming more institutionalized, and that this in turn is a valid reason to expect large caps to do better.Therefore it may be more than a late bull market phenomenon. In the 1970's there was much more direct individual holding of stocks. Today the public hires managers to do it. Just look at the list of mutual funds in the WSJ. Unbelievable. In any case the small caps are dead in the water until after tax loss selling.

To: Sam Citron who wrote (2492)	9/9/1998 4:23:00 PM
From: growthvalue	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 3424

"Some would say that the ability of anyone to consistently outperform the index proves that the market is not a random walk" Those who would say that are actually incorrect. If you had a million people try to guess the outcome of 10 consecutive coin flips, approximately 977 people would be expected to get all 10 guesses right. That doesn't change the fact that on average, you can't guess a coin flip with better than 50/50 accuracy. I'm not saying the market actually is a random walk, I'm just saying that "the ability of anyone to consistently outperform the index" doesn't necessarily disprove it. Tim