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 : Compaq -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: rupert1 who wrote (60450)	5/4/1999 10:52:00 AM
From: JRI	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 97611

Victor...you are pointing to some of what I also saw: namely, that the posted survey did not list conditions, population surveyed, etc....however, consider the following: (1) The survey did list this information, but because it was not captured in the post, you are assuming that the information was not present (in the original document). I find it hard to believe that Milunovich did not (for example) list in the original survey document the # of respondants, or when the survey was performed... (2) I think it is safe to assume that the survey, in all likelihood, was a on-line or paper document...the questions were created by someone on Merrill Lynch's team.....that would explain the interests of the pollster, no? (3) Merrill Lynch is paid to analyze data, and give their opinions. So, if that makes them bias, then they are bias. But it kindof the nature of the beast, no? They have to come down somewhere, after presenting the data.. I didn't find the questions ambiguous or irrelevant...just my humble opinion. As an academic exercise, the method may not be flawless, but I think it achieves what it is trying to accomplish: Get answers to specific questions from its surveyed population.......my only (real) question: how big was the survey? The other questions you raised don't appear near as important to me... You could argument that an independent (3rd) party (without a broker affiliation) could give us a higher degree of comfort (concerning biases), but I, for one, am not from the school that all analysts are scoundrals, always skewing data to suit their needs (some do, some don't, some do more than others)...In this particular case, I think Milunovich printed the data as it was received...so I don't see any corruption....always a chance I could be wrong... And, as they say, you are only as good as your sample <G> But "superficial" still doesn't seem to fit...but you guys speak kind of funny anyway, so maybe you use the word differently than me <g> Please dont call me an obscure name that I won't understand...it will only have me scrambling for my Webster's <G>