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 : LSI Corporation -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: sea_biscuit who wrote (18264)	4/23/1999 7:18:00 PM
From: Jock Hutchinson	Respond to of 25814

That makes perfect sense. As William O'Neil has repeatedly observed; The one group of stocks that consistently makes higher highs is the group of stocks that has just made higher highs. Thus, on balance, the analyst community would want to issue/continue buy ratings for stocks that are at or near their all-time highs. And it is often the case that these strong buy ratings have been in place for a long time. In cases of companies like MSFT, INTC, and others, those buy ratings have been in place by years. And as a result, people who are foolish enough to believe you and Addi that analysts are con artists, have completely missed the boat. I suppose that when MSFT falls due to Linux that you will point out the number of buy ratings to justify your thinking. But the fact is that the people who followed the analysts' ratings will have become multi millionaires in the process. Similarly, it is very likely that a stock that does fall from a peak will have had buy ratings attached to it just before it falls. And by contrast, one would expect to see a number of holds when a stock is at its bottom.