SI
SI
discoversearch

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 : A.I.M Users Group Bulletin Board -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: OldAIMGuy who wrote (7563)5/31/1999 10:46:00 AM
From: JZGalt  Read Replies (2) | Respond to of 18928
 
Tom,

The motto might be true, but you could be a long way underwater if a few things hadn't gone just right last year. If you had AIM'ed stocks in the 1928 market, how long before you would have a buy signal or would you have run out of cash first? AIMers would have done much better than buy and holders, but it is still quite brutal to lose 40-50-70% of your capital.

As far as I am concerned last summer was a damn close thing. Before Greenspan cut rates in the US and it was clear that China would not devalue, it could have gone either way. I hope I don't see that again.

As far as years to erase the scars, a personal note. My brother are much older than me and had invested in the stock market in the 1960's. When my father died in the early 1980's I converted all my mothers t-bonds, cash accounts in banks and other assets she didn't need to live on and converted it into the bluest of blue chips (XON, MOB, AHP, MRK). At that point in time, almost 20 years had past and they still hadn't put money back in the market. 15 years later they were giving me investment "advice".

My point is when you lose sufficient capital in an investment, you tend not to go back for perhaps decades not years. I honestly believe the only reason they went back into the market was the 20+% returns in the market vs. the 3% in the bank. If the stock market was slugging along at the 10-12% return level, I honestly think they would still be holding cash.

The other motto that applies is "A fool and his money are soon parted." <grin>

----
Dave



To: OldAIMGuy who wrote (7563)5/31/1999 3:41:00 PM
From: LemonHead  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 18928
 
Field Question - Newport Splits.
Do you update the Minumum Number of Shares to Trade in ratio to the split?

Example: 1000 shares of QWST, 2 for 1 split.
I go to the stock symbol, then to the bottom of the screen and click on Maintenance. Then I change my share quanity to 2000. I notice that the Minimum Number of Shares to Trade is set at 100 (had 1000 prior to split and using 10% or 100). So do I change the Minimum Number to 200?

Keith