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.

Microcap & Penny Stocks : Microphonics Inc. (mrps) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Dave Gore who wrote (6660)	5/4/1999 11:11:00 PM
From: JoeinIowa	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 8189

MRPS - Technicals Two strong closes the last two days. Not sure if people are anticipating a premarket open announcement? The technicals are looking ok. An up day on high volume will trigger a strong upward signal. Right now the technicals are indicating anticipation of news. If we get it we are good to go. JoeinIowa

To: Dave Gore who wrote (6660)	5/4/1999 11:16:00 PM
From: D. RUTTER	Respond to of 8189

GOLF???????? I'm in... DR

To: Dave Gore who wrote (6660)	5/5/1999 12:17:00 AM
From: CYBERKEN	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 8189

It might serve younger investors well to repeat 2 rarely-mentioned but profound heresies: No investors have lost more in the markets over the years than those who have studied detailed financial statements and filings without being the least bit qualified to do so, then made wrong-headed investment decisions based on what they thought was proper due diligence. Financial statements are the worst kind of rear-view mirror look at a company, often containing unusual statistics or boilerplate statements that chase the investor away right before he's about to make a decent profit. Certainly these published records have their place in research, but it's far too easy to use them as a crutch and then make wrong decisions. So what better serves as DD? All those calls to Jimmy and Miles, Joe MA's profit projections based on what is known and newly announced, and those wonderful posters who have tried the product and given us their specialized views. What seems to bother the truly neurotic and increasingly ignored on the thread is that this information reduces risk but doesn't eliminate it. That leads to underexposed heresy #2: No DD eliminates risk, and some DD increases it. My sincere thanks to all who have reported their conversations with the principals and their experiences with the product. I expect the financials will soon be out and NOT contain any ticking bombs, but I haven't lost a minute's sleep over that prospect.