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 : Intel Corporation (INTC) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Tony Viola who wrote (79221)	4/15/1999 11:08:00 AM
From: Jill	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 186894

Tony, fully sympathetic, also have EMC. It's a new era when a loser in a sector can instantly tar the sector, rather than a litle analysis to find out if they are having market share taken away from them by a winner (CPQ/DELL...perhaps STK/EMC but I know nothing of STK...figure the battle in storage will shape up btw EMC and DELL...) And MSFT--even if boxes are given away and ruin the whole box sector (gimme a break! that's wrong on many counts)--the more boxes, the more windows, so... What I don't yet understand is the actual lines of collusion here. I know it's not just individual investors who are influenced. They can't all be panicked into buying high and selling low repeatedly. And I notice that even unrelated stocks of mine, like the stodgy glorious WMT, go down in sympathy on days like yesterday and today. Analysts can actually move institutional sales like that? Now, again, I know brokerages make a living by churning...I know they underwrite certain clients and are biased...but what I'm too new to understand is how a single call by a biased observer shifts the whole thing. Can anybody enlighten me?