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 : PSFT - Fiscal 1998 - Discussion for the next year -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Tom_ who wrote (3208)	10/23/1998 2:20:00 PM
From: Chuzzlewit	Read Replies (4) \| Respond to of 4509

Tom, since Melissa is one of my favorite posters on this thread, and she specifically asked me not to comment, I bit my tongue (there is blood spurting) and let the thing pass. But I can't stand it anymore!! I have such little self-control. TA is nonsense, and it has no place in reasonable discussions on companies and markets. Nobody has ever shown statistically that the method has any validity, and the only people who become wealthy using the method are those who sell newsletters, pamphlets and software designed to capitalize on gullibility. As PT Barnum said, there is a sucker born every minute, and five to take his money. I'd as soon listen to an astrologer as invest any money on prognostications based on TA. An astute poster to this thread noted back in April that License revenues as a percent of total revenues had declined, and license growth quarter over quarter had also declined. In retrospect, I think that was the reason that the stock began its descent. That was the harbinger of the bad news we got on Tuesday. It had nothing to do with support levels or resistance levels or double bottoms or head and shoulders or sup and saucers or crows sitting on a tree or dogs baying at the moon. It was due to a perception on the part of the investment community that sales would likely grow at a substantially lower rate then previously anticipated. And when you said And then, worse: when, by the law of statistical inevitability, they hit it right, once, there's no stopping them, ever. I wanted to stand up and cheer. That explains why gc will continue to beat his chest for weeks to come. Well, enough for now. Melissa, will you ever forgive me <VBG>? TTFN, CTC

To: Tom_ who wrote (3208)	10/23/1998 2:26:00 PM
From: Melissa McAuliffe	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 4509

Oh.....says who???<g> Seriously, the point of my comments wasn't intended to be how TA should be presented. TA just happened to be the subject. If Chuzz, e.g. had said the stock price was overvalued based on fundamental analysis without being specific (which he'd never do<g>), and the fundamentals didn't support his statement, I would have written essentially the same response just changing the words to relate to fundamental analysis. But the point would have been the same. I don't care what anyone says on this or other threads....bullish or bearish. It's their right. All I'm saying is that if it's an opinion you shouldn't make statements like "the chart shows" or "the fundamentals show", etc. unless you can back up your statement. Maybe I'm the only person with this problem anyway in which case I should stop cluttering up the thread with this. Actually I should just stop over and visit the yhoo thread. Every time I do I realize how nice it is over here. I guess you get what you pay for. Speaking of which, does it bother anyone else that unless people want to actually post messages they don't ever have to pay anything to SI and can read these SI threads to their heart's content??

To: Tom_ who wrote (3208)	10/23/1998 9:08:00 PM
From: Dave O.	Respond to of 4509

** OT **** <If TA worked, the stock world would be awash with anal/mathematical zillionaires > Ever hear of Marty Schwartz? If not, read Market Wizards (Schwager). He used TA to run $40,000 up to $20,000,000 with no more than 3% drawdown. To quote "I laugh at people who say 'I've never met a rich technician'. I love that! It is such an arrogant, nonsensical response. I used fundamentals for nine years and got rich as a technician". -- Marty Schwartz This is just one example, many people make money using TA. I'm not saying it works for everyone because each person uses different indicators and in the end, it's how a technician interprets the indicators and transforms them into buy/sell decisions. What one person sees as a buy signal may be nothing but noise to another. Dave