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.

Pastimes : The Naked Truth - Big Kahuna a Myth -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: IceShark who wrote (18991)	2/10/1999 8:04:00 PM
From: Lucretius	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 86076

ho ho ho techstocks.com

To: IceShark who wrote (18991)	2/11/1999 5:12:00 AM
From: accountclosed	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 86076

Ice, I don't know that I can recall all of the points. Others that saw it or Bill himself may be able to fill in the gaps in what I can remember. My impression at the end of it was that if this thread spent an entire day working together trying to write down an eloquent version of why the market was too high and what was going to happen, we could not have done better. ==== He repeatedly stated that the market was well overvalued. That the recent advance had been parabolic. That many PM's had held their nose when buying stocks and only did so because that was what they were charged with in doing their job. As a result the rally had become more and more narrow over recent months. Sue Herera tried to say "Well do you feel the correction has somewhat run its course"...And the answer was in the tone of voice as well as the words to the effect of "no indeed"...He kept indicating that we had much further to go on the downside. That people that were dipping were in for rude surprises. Sue asked him about his positive stance on bonds. He responded that he was somewhat constructive on bonds above 5.25 and that we were well above that here, but his primary interest in that area was a hedge against disaster. Sue asked him to clarify whether he would take money off the table and put it into bonds. He said he definitely would take money off the table and that cash looked very attractive to him. That money market yields were quite reasonable and that real rates of return given low inflation should be considered. Mostly though the idea was taking money off the table. When Sue asked him what stocks he would buy when the extended downturn he foresaw would end, he commented that he would look at stocks that benefited from the internet, but not internet stocks themselves which could look forward to being totally and completely smashed. He also commented that this was going to get very ugly and many people unfortunately were going to be seriously hurt before it was over. The charts he said looked to him like we might well soon take out the October lows. The drop he foresaw would have lasting impact on investor psychology. ======= There were many more points and I may not have worded everything I did exactly as he stated it. But the impression that I'm sure the audience was left with was a very well reasoned, sobering look at the markets in a mania. It was the consistency and soberness and clear thinking that came through as very impressive. Others: Terry, MMV, what points did I leave out? Bill, did I represent it fairly?