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 : Ampex Corporation (AEXCA) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Scott Pedigo who wrote (5149)	2/2/1999 12:59:00 PM
From: Hal Campbell	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 17679

SOOO many posts. All good. As a post skimmer I wish i could reply to all. No time. Nice pickup William. The job posting Jubimer first brought to our attention. Exceptional debate, BA and Scott. Enjoyed every word. Thanks.( Scott, I have very similar problems on the sell side. Have to learn to separate my buy and sell criteria carefully. I have tended to grab the bird in the hand so quickly that I only came away with a few tail feathers. Oddly enough I changed all of that for the first time with AXC ...lol..what a time to change.) Jubimer thanks for responding to Esecurities. He has quite a profile- would love to have him join in too - but I do have a problem with anyone that posts the wording of a shareholder litigation in that manner. Tendentious beyond words. Al, you have always had the makings of a very Krafty investor- you just don't realize it yet. Michael, your post was not disjointed. I hear ya. You may be right. And the story here has multiple levels and should keep on " streaming" - well before the revenues stream. But I have seen great stories develop unnoticed for quite a long time - as convinced shareholders steamed with impatience - then all of a sudden a critical mass occurs and WHAMMO ( lol...or some variation of whammo ) Trouble is I usually have sold into the W. But I am not convinced enough in my own timing od surge guess to debate its valididty. As for axc evangelism - wellll ...lol...told my uncle to hang on to his shares a couple more years. May describe the new horizons to my cousin the brokerage VP- if he is still speaking to me.,....lol. That's about it for me. Can handle my own uncertainties.Can handle the unique AXC experience myself. Would need to put most anyone else through a training camp to see if they make the cut. So the stock based evangelism I will have to leave to others. ....though it is amazing how people with no interest when the stock was under 1, become enthusiastic at 5 ...then get to feeling crushed when it hits the threes or below. Guess the old saying that the market is the only store everyone runs out of when a sale is on is true. Then when prices rise, people happily return. May many of them return to AXC someday ....at much higher levels. Someday ......... the story is there now. For a long time it was not.

To: Scott Pedigo who wrote (5149)	2/3/1999 4:01:00 AM
From: B. A. Marlow	Respond to of 17679

Many thanks, Scott. It's the spirit of discourse that makes us proud. You're hot on the trail of "good business." And we have it all in this sandbox. You raise an interesting question concerning the relationship between "stock promotion" and "pyramiding." In my experience, the answer is this: There is both no difference and a world of difference. Let's take a closer look. First, we should agree that all matters having to do with money are "games." But thereafter, distinctions count. For this adventure, we'll eliminate games that are "zero-sum." In these, someone wins and someone loses. While gambling and fraud are its chief proponents, what we generally refer to as "investing" lives in a different domain. Still, legitimate financial activities can also be zero-sum. Options, in particular, represent a nearly perfect picture of the zero-sum dynamic. So, we come to stock investing. Here, the operative notion is that of "rising expectations." In turn, this concept is a proxy for "social confidence," and suggests why investing and capitalism are inextricably linked. The key distinction between the theory of investing and that of the Ponzi scheme is the empirical role played by intrinsic value. One never really owns anything in a pyramid game. Although I'm not an engineer, I believe I can postulate that the "laws of physics" apply. Where all "multi-level marketing" promotions and "chain letters" will eventually hit a proverbial brick wall, market-economy investing, while imperfect, has worked quite well for more than a century. The reason is that no law of physics need be violated for a good investment to produce results. As long as expectations can rise, a stock's price can rise. And the driver of the bus is productivity. Market-economy investing is, therefore, "Win-Win." While our society forbids you from profiting at the expense of another whose participation is secured by deceitful means, you may always offer a business idea, subject to a prospective investor's due diligence and your fair and full disclosure. In doing so, you are potentially empowering a person to act on his or her own behalf. In a democracy, you might even consider this an obligation. For many, the alternative is to consign their fate to the "Wise": anonymous mutual fund managers who, more than 90 percent of the time, will fail to perform as well as the market at large. Don't your correspondents deserve better? And of course, in no way does your contribution imply the absence of volatility or risk. Even though bad investments might indeed be the fault of "clueless investors," these are not people to whom you would knowingly provide information, let alone advice. In the end, and as always, "good business" is a question of character. As someone once said, "Character matters..." BAM