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.

Strategies & Market Trends : Value Investing -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Bob Rudd who wrote (7200)	5/18/1999 12:59:00 PM
From: Madharry	Respond to of 78476

I guess the gorilla game makes sense to some extent some people perform better than others, and frequently in a business the leader makes the bulk of the profits, unless it is an Amazon. HOwever it seems to me that technology changes with each cycle and there is no guaranty that the leader in one cycle will be the leader in the next cycle, a company can rise again from oblivion with a great product in its next cycle. Microsoft may be broken up yet! I am now and have been playing technology stocks that have poor current results but promising technology coupled with stakes in other tech companies that are not IMHO reflected in their market values. Specifically VOCL and ALSC. VOCL has yet to turn a profit but it has signed agreements for a 14 city trial with China TELECOM. SHort term risk is mitigated by $3 in cash and a significant stake in IXTC a private company currently owned by ATT, VOCL, among others and headed by TOm Evelsin, formerly of ATT. Only a matter of time before this one goes public. ALSC, Alliance semiconductor, has stakes in Broadcom and a couple of Taiwanese foundries. Not sure about their products but they seem to make some pretty good investments which I estimate are worth double the current market price. FOr straight value seekers there is always Deswell. I added today and am happy with my 8% dividend as I wait for its inexorable rise to a realistic share price, in the $15-19 range.

To: Bob Rudd who wrote (7200)	5/18/1999 3:48:00 PM
From: Michael Burry	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 78476

Bob, I guess to me the GG is based upon something much different than Graham's or Buffett's teaching, with a much shorter historical foundation. As to how many tech investors have read it, I'd say a good number have probably become familiar with it. Non tech investors and tech speculators maybe not. Re: AAPL, only time will tell who wins this argument. Me and the newbie or the the rest of most of this thread and visitors to my site who've e-mailed me to tell me how AAPL could never be a value stock and definitely should not be a long-term hold. A good analyst friend even sent me a 6 page report outlining the bear case. I still don't agree. Re: EVA, I did get the file; thank you. I also came across some of Buffett's discussion of EVA. I am bothered as he is by the tenet of estimating a cost of equity using EM-based CAPM, and the debt issue. Buffett has said before something like that the margin of safety should be so large that one shouldn't have to carry it out to the nth decimal point. Maybe I too should just set my hurdle rate for would-be Buffett-like investments, and leave it at that, and continue to also use my other measures. Still working on this concept. Mike