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 : AUTOHOME, Inc -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Jing Qian who wrote (6556)	3/23/1999 12:37:00 AM
From: Ahda	Respond to of 29970

I have no words for you think as you wish.

To: Jing Qian who wrote (6556)	3/23/1999 12:46:00 AM
From: Boplicity	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 29970

ah's very first ATHM post. Saturday, Nov 15 1997 1:18PM ET Reply # of 6558 Dealer market saw 100 share trades at 18 1/4. What time frame do you mean for "short term"? When there is a paucity of buying interest, prices are strongly influenced by non-convicted trading action. There isn't much non-structural shorting going on because there is too much volatility potential, so there can't be many "momentum" players at work. There are plenty of manipulators that are trying to sell 500 on the way down so that they can buy a 1000 at lower prices using "overvaluation" as the psychological smokescreen. I sure hope it free falls because it would be an incredible opportunity to buy. "Run it up one more time"? You sound like you're trading. Although this issue has to be one of the most volatile because of the valuation indeterminancy, I don't consider it to be a good trading vehicle. That is always the nature of a sound fundamental investment. Besides, don't trade. Trading is a negative expected return game. I have spent 23 years and 15,000 option trades proving that truth. I was a broker, PSOE trader, institutional portfolio manager, and since 1970, stock investor for my own account. The only money that stayed with me after all of that came from stocks I bought and never sold no matter how dumpy or "overvalued" the companies were when I bought them. Greg

To: Jing Qian who wrote (6556)	3/23/1999 1:20:00 AM
From: ftth	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 29970

[ot]Jing, since you are the master of logical conclusions, how is it that you are able to conclude that a poster on another anonymous message board is the same as one here? And why is it that you assume the "first" profile that you are aware of is the correct one? Why isn't the second one correct? Or maybe neither? Sometimes your logic is just bewildering. Not that I'm trying to defend Ahhaha (and not that he needs anyone to defend him [and how do we know he's not a she :o) ]), but you have on several occassions made value judgements based on a persons profile. That's like buying a stock based on a broker recommendation! Or worse yet, Steve Harmon! (I see you're growing feathers on your way to the sea) Frankly, a person's profile, age, and claims should be completely irrelevant, if not completely ignored. Use 'em for entertainment only. If a person has true expertise, that will be obvious from their posts without them saying a word to specifically address that. If they're 25, but have more knowledge of theory and/or practice than most 50 year olds, why should it matter? If they're 60 and ooze with wisdom--but say they're 25 in the profile--what's the harm? Forget trying to label people and respond with constructive comments of the content within their posts. Over time, you learn how much weight to assign to a person's posts based on their history of posts--not on their age or claims.