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.

Biotech / Medical : T/FIF Portfolio -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: scaram(o)uche who wrote (775)	4/10/1999 7:33:00 PM
From: Mike McFarland	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1073

Well, we shall see how easy it is to reduce the number of posts!--I have found that the internet, and specifically this virtual invesment club we have here on SI, to be incredibly addictive. Even though I know I am just barely scraching the surface, I cant tell you how satisfying it is to read some press release, sort through a biotech thread for more of the puzzle, and then fly off to the glossary of my text book to decode an abstract. If what you have said before is true--filter out the scams, dogma and the hype, and then focus on science that remains...well, then this endeavor may just pay off years from now. A big thank-you goes to you for helping point in the right direction. Thanks also for that list of names you dropped off. By the way, in a few days I'll have sort of a first approximation/overview on Isis done for the new Cancer thread, please feel free to drop by and help assess the situation as it clarifies--I don't yet have the foggiest idea what antisense oligonucleotides are all about, but I'll give it a try.

To: scaram(o)uche who wrote (775)	4/11/1999 4:46:00 AM
From: LLCF	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1073

< They have vested interests, and they are paid to maintain them.> I couldn't agree more... and unfortunately this fact eliminates or lessens the ability of the analyst or fund manager to guard against simple "human nature": Part of Human learning is recognizing patterns and if one is not careful and diligent he/she will, among other things: 1.) Unwittingly extrapolate recognized patterns to unreasonable lengths. 2.) Seemingly recognize patterns that don't really exist. Almost by definition they are "too close" to the situation and can be misled if not careful and "diligent" (a word that seems to have lost meaning in the investment world with the extended bull market). Gilovich's excellent book "How We Know wWhat Isn't So" should be mandatory reading for the fund manager. It points out many other common flaws of human reasoning that can mislead those that aren't diligent in formulating opinion &/or strategy based on their observations. One obvious one is the tendency to overweight easily observable data and ignore perhaps equally important data that may not be in our faces every day (on CNBC?). It's pretty easy to see how this relates to the biotech sector as a whole, and especially the "non-profitable" (as opposed to investment stage! ha ha good example) portion. Of course the current situation will eventually reverse itself, either by 1.) a sudden paradigm shift brought on by some event ("CHIRON TO BUY 4 BIOTECH COMPANIES"-read all about it) or 2.) a slow reversal... ie. companies will become discovered based on earnings. There are infinite funds following accelerating earnings. Even 2.) will become a shift at some point as products start rolling out and more companies turn profitable. This naturally attracts attention to find the "next one" and so on... until at some point... ooppss, the fund managers are unwittingly extrapolating the recognized pattern to unreasonable lengths! In the meantime, those that recognize these facts must sit tight and accumulate... by definition this is frustrating, boring, not sexy, and certainly not on CNBC. DAK Oh yea, by the way: <Those who have a nose for stories....... Karen Bernstein, Stephen Edgington, Cynthia Robbins-Roth....> I know Karen Bernstein is @ "BioCentury", where are the others?? Thanks.

To: scaram(o)uche who wrote (775)	4/11/1999 4:40:00 PM
From: Mark Adams	Respond to of 1073

Richard, I'm one of those nameless masses who have you bookmarked, because another individual recommended you as a knowledgeable individual worth following. Nevertheless, I found that your efforts go beyond my limited understanding of Biology, so I've not read all your posts, nor looked into every company that may come up in your dialogs. I appreciate your efforts nonetheless. I'm sorry to hear, that open communication can harm a positive group or direction, especially when it comes to situations which may benefit humanity. However, I'd think that the answer would be more communication rather than less. Higher awareness of the misuse of information for personal gain will benifit all in the end. The recent, better publicized efforts to manipulate stock prices by molding public opinion (ie false press releases, upgrades from nonexistent analysts) have resulted in greater awareness of these abuses by us investors and the SEC. I doubt that these scams will ever lose complete effectiveness though, witness the 'contest scams' and chain letters which continue today. Opinion molding has occurred prior to the Internet, and still occurs on sector wide basis which mutual fund managers can leverage via sector rotation to improve gains. There isn't much that can be done, other than recognizing that when the press seems focused on the downfall of the sector, it's time to look for buys, and when the sector can do no wrong, profit taking may be in order. I respect your decision, but encourage you to look for alternatives other than withdrawing into a clique of experts. Ask yourself, "How can the experts encourage the flow of funds into companies that can improve the quality of existance?" The answer might surprise you.