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 : Rande Is . . . HOME -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Bucky Katt who wrote (7771)	6/1/1999 9:40:00 PM
From: pressboxjr	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 57584

Good post William. I just finished looking at some charts of some of the internet stocks. While some people may see it as a buying opportunity, IMO there is still more downside to come. Only 1 word can describe what I was looking at ----- UGLY. Oh, by the way, just for fun, I looked up a chart on UGLY (and yes, that stock does exist), and it's chart looks great! Go figure. Right now, I wouldn't touch an internet stock with a ten foot pole. Too much uncertainty and potential problems looming. I'm keeping one eye on the Fed (interest rates) and the other on India and Pakistan (potential nuke showdown).

To: Bucky Katt who wrote (7771)	6/1/1999 11:49:00 PM
From: ynot	Respond to of 57584

A Short History of Financial Euphoria, John Kenneth Galbraith Social Security $ to Republican Munitions Manufacturers that are screaming to cut Social Security...who needs TV entertainment Just a thought ynot :)

To: Bucky Katt who wrote (7771)	6/2/1999 9:13:00 AM
From: Rande Is	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 57584

HOW TO AVOID MARGIN CALLS. . . . Don't buy on margin. . . duh Have your broker set your status to cash. . .if you don't have it. . .you can't buy it. . . keep your OWN money on the sidelines from which to borrow. . . NOT THEIRS. Rande Is

To: Bucky Katt who wrote (7771)	6/2/1999 9:23:00 AM
From: Rande Is	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 57584

Barron's and Forbes can be counted on by bears to destroy the internets at just the right time to benefit them most. You guys know what I think of such magazine articles by companies that actually charge money to list company reviews within the text of the magazine. I have nothing against magazines in general. This might sound nuts to some, but I receive about 30 magazines on a professional complimentary basis each month. In addition, I do glance thru many online magazines. But think about it. . . the largest E-commerce company in the world, which is the leader of a multi-billion dollar market that is expected to increase with J-curve momentum is SUDDENLY a "bomb" or a penny stock. When you hear such PERFECTLY chosen phrases, it should always put you in mind of the author. Journalists are SUPPOSED to be unbiased. When an article is praising or bashing. . .it is not. My feeling has always been that all journalists should be required to post disclaimers on their financial positions, those of their employers [all the way up the ladder] and their political stance. This way the reader has a clue as to the motives of the writer. These magazines ought to just call the company a "pig" or use other selected phrases heard in chat rooms by short-sellers to intimidate longs into selling, thus causing weakness in the trading. And once again, the SEC sits blindly on the sidelines. Rande Is