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 : Dell Technologies Inc. -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Chuzzlewit who wrote (91564)	1/27/1999 3:34:00 AM
From: On the QT	Respond to of 176387

REF: QT, " unless you are referring to something I somehow missed" Chuzz , I'll be more specific. You missed nothing that I know of in the area you addressed. When I referred to "We addressed this", I had in mind you, Geoff, Apratim and myself. (My apologies if I left anyone out). You in fact, were the one who introduced the sequence of postings, that led to the poster, Amein M Alsuezi, trying to make the case that a MM profitably could move the markets . He was under the "gun" from us in varying degrees. It was a difficult assignment. One, that based on the challenge, I thought to be a no " brainer". Now at the time, I was a casual observer. I saw him drawn into a bad bet. Thought to myself here we go again. Another uneven game being presented and unfortunately accepted. A no win situation for Amein. I didn't give it much thought until I saw the work he put into his model. I viewed Amien's presentation as an effort worthy of respect. Here was someone who seriously tried to see if he could develop a way to show that this undertaken could be demonstrated. In the "show me how", he presented two scenarios to demonstrate how this could happen. He took the challenge head on. He worked with trade and volume examples. He reworked his presentation. Ultimately he could not "prove", with the trade and volume examples he provided, that it could be profitable done. However in this attempt, I was attracted to a thinking process expressed in a unique fashion. What I did was suspend by disbelief and worked with his model as a matter of respect for the effort graciously put into it, and to see where it would lead us. In our exchange I walked Amein's path and saw things through his eyes. In the process of working his "assignment", I had a sense of lets be open minded, lets try to be for one another, as equals. Each with our own gifts. I like working and dialoguing with someone who seems alive, eager, nice, thoughtful and game. I saw someone who was willing to walk a dark path with courage and ingenuity and even when he saw that his original model was putting the MM into a huge hole, he sought a way to still come back to profitability. It was in that whole process in working his numbers with him, his gamesmanship, he getting hit by his peers, remaining eager under circumstances perhaps that would have been demoralizing to some, that drew me to Amein. To me it is not so much in proving the point, its all about what happens comes when two or more agree to work and to discover together. He was good to be in dialogue with. I wanted him to be right for him and applauded his attitude. To me, what was important was our willingness to work together in a spirit of cooperation. Had Amein proved his case it would have been no less of worthy undertaking. He has an eagerness and an innovative mind. I gained an insight in how he approached a problem and the fresh way in which he constructed a scenario. His mathematical and thinking skills were used in a way that I admired and appreciated. It was for those reasons that the real learning process and joy for me took place. That may be what you missed . Regards, QT