SI
SI
discoversearch

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 : Compaq -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: Night Writer who wrote (41448)12/28/1998 11:44:00 AM
From: Kenya AA  Read Replies (2) | Respond to of 97611
 
Hi NW: I'm just telling you that I've been convinced by hard facts and logical conclusions based on those facts that P/E ratios are not factors in stock price movement. I will be happy to examine evidence to the contrary - I have an open mind. If you're going to consider them, projected P/Es would seem to make more sense since the market is forward looking.

"Based on what you are saying, I should sell CPQ and jump into Internets with my retirement money."

Not saying that at all. There are other factors that should be considered such as earnings momentum, current TA analysis, and general market conditions. Also, IMO, retirement money is a whole different animal with all kinds of considerations - I don't even handle any of my own retirement $. I don't know what internet stock you should buy, but if I see a "sure thing" I'll let you know. I've been following your posts for a long time - you and I don't operate in the same "market space". You appear to be a longer range investor as in what stocks will be good for '99 - I'm more interested in what stocks will be good for this week. Am I wrong in this assessment?

K



To: Night Writer who wrote (41448)12/28/1998 9:28:00 PM
From: Pruguy  Read Replies (2) | Respond to of 97611
 
I'm with you NW, Kenya is describing what I would refer to as momentum investing, which is just a more aggresive style of technical investing. I suppose that reasoning would create a lot of new investors chasing ostrich farm stocks if those got hot again. I can see it now: Ostrichfarms.com , the next hot IPO



To: Night Writer who wrote (41448)12/29/1998 9:03:00 AM
From: Kenya AA  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 97611
 
NW: Thought you'd enjoy this ....

K

Wrong! Tactics and Strategies: The Rules of the E-Game
By James J. Cramer
12/29/98 7:32 AM ET

Investing carries with it certain rules, rules meant to help us spot undervaluation and avoid overvaluation. Trading carries with it certain patterns, patterns meant to produce winning trades and reduce losing trades.

If traders see a head-and-shoulders pattern developing, they would instinctively shy away from the long side. If they see a big saucer bottom on good volume, they would be drawn to buying stock.

I know, I know, where is he going with this soporific rap? Well, what if e-trading has its own set of patterns, patterns that always produce a winner? Wouldn't we be silly to avoid these patterns or not learn from them?

I have spent months trying to understand the rhythm of the Net stocks and how they trade, and I've come up with what I think is a theory about how they work. It seems almost too intuitive, but that's not surprising considering this tape. Here are the patterns of e-trading as I see them.

One, if a company uses ".com" in a press release and you can buy 1,000 shares faster than anybody else, you stand to make a couple of thousand dollars.

Two, if a company uses ".com" in a press release having never used that phrase before and you can buy 1,000 shares faster than anybody else, you stand to make about $5,000.

Three, if a company mentions a high growth rate for its Web site in a press release and you can buy 1,000 shares faster than anybody else, you can make six or seven times your money by noon.

Four, if a company issues a press release and in it are the words "joint venture" and any mention of America Online (AOL:NYSE), Yahoo! (YHOO:Nasdaq) or Amazon (AMZN:Nasdaq), and you can buy 1,000 shares faster than anybody else, you can make $10,000. If a company issues a release and in it are the words "joint venture" and mention of Excite (XCIT:Nasdaq), Infoseek (SEEK:Nasdaq) or Lycos (LCOS:Nasdaq), and you can buy 1,000 shares faster than anybody else, you can make about $4,000.

Five, if a company gets mentioned on day one by Joe Kernen as appearing on Squawk Box the following morning, and you can buy 1,000 shares faster than anybody else -- and hold it overnight -- you can make $15,000 by the end of the interview on day two. (Avoid Cramer as a co-host.)

Six, if a .com company issues a press release announcing it is going to be on CNBC and you can buy 1,000 shares faster than anybody else, you can make $5,000.

Seven, if a non-.com company announces in a press release that it is teaming up with a .com company and you can buy 1,000 shares of the non-.com company faster than anybody else, you will make about a half-point. If you can buy 1,000 shares of the .com company faster than anybody else, you will make about three points.

Eight, if a .com company issues a positive press release but you cannot get there fast enough, you can take 1,000 shares of Amazon, eBay (EBAY:Nasdaq) or uBid (UBID:Nasdaq), if the former is a commerce site, and still make four or five points. If the former is pseudo-portal site or an adjunct to a legitimate portal site and you take 1,000 shares of AOL, Yahoo, Lycos, Excite or Infoseek, you will make $3,000.
There you have it. Eight simple rules that work. And as long as they continue to work, you are going to have the lunacy you see every day in this market continue. At least you know the rules now, so ladies and gentlemen, start your cable modems.