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 : Ampex Corporation (AEXCA) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Carl R. who wrote (7518)	4/18/1999 3:48:00 PM
From: Michael Olds	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 17679

A TA goose, from BARRON'S, 4/19, Michael Santoli, THE STRIKING PRICE michael.santoli@news.barrons.com “Armchair market watchers aren't the only ones left at a loss these days by the stunning one-day jumps and dives of so many stocks. Indeed, even the number crunches and the formulas they rely on to make trading decisions fail to account for just how potentially volatile a given stock is likely to be. And this systematic low-balling of potential volatility can have serious implications … Larry McMillan of McMillan Analysis offers a primer on this phenomenon with an important bit of recent research. The crux of the issue is that just about all probability estimates that go into option screening and pricing models rely on a “normal” distribution of a stock's historical price volatility. The standard bell curve is one sort of representation of normal distribution, which would suggest that a particularly large price move (in statistical terms not necessary to explain here, three standard deviations) should occur no more than 1/10 th of 1% of the time. A massive move of close to three times that magnitude should be nearly impossible – the probability number has 15 zeros after the decimal. Yet by picking a trading day at random, McMillan showed that such moves happen with regularity… The reason for the underestimation of possible movements is that the only way to gauge such things is to use a stock's price history. And a fundamental rule of history is that things are “normal” only until they're not….” Bollinger bands are 389% wider than normal as of yesterday. This is the second time this year they have been wider than normal to this degree. At this rate 400% wider than normal will be normal.

To: Carl R. who wrote (7518)	4/18/1999 3:54:00 PM
From: Michael Olds	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 17679

Carl, I ask your patience. I am not yet convinced. First, however, let me say that I am absolutely of the opinion that an IPO is being thought about. It is the timing I am questioning. And it is the need for immediate capital and the best way to get it while insuring as best as possible a long future as both a holding company and as a broadcast network. So I am asking, what do youall think the plan was before the AOL deal, taking into consideration that the Gardy's in the organization would probably have to convince Bramson in the same way as you are having to convince me. And second, if Bramson's plan was not an IPO, how would you suggest that his idea would be transitioned to your idea. Something was set rolling before the AOL story, and I doubt seriously if the whole thing was just thrown out, and the way it looks to me, it needed as much new money as the story does today.