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 : Discuss Year 2000 Issues -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: J.L. Turner who wrote (4322)	3/5/1999 10:44:00 AM
From: Bill Ounce	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 9818

re: Bruce Webster analysis. This is one of the best balanced analysis I've seen to date.

To: J.L. Turner who wrote (4322)	3/5/1999 12:43:00 PM
From: O. H. Rundell	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 9818

JLT, Thanks for putting up Bruce Webster's analysis of the Senate report. I'm having some difficulty reconciling his move from a "5" to a "6" with the probabilities shown in his table. He shows a (new) .66 probability of a "5" or less, and a median of "5". I do note that he remarks that "Even these adjusted probabilities may be optimistic...." Bruce's "6" puts him very much in line with Dr. Ed Yardeni, who BTY has now gone to a table of probabilities similar to the one in Bruce's post--although condensed into 5 levels of outcome. yardeni.com It is difficult to know if there is really much substance behind the assignment of probabilities to the various outcomes, but this type of presentation is much to be preferred over a single number. After all, who--other than the Kid--really knows...? <g> O. H.