Sharechat Logo

Forum Archive Index - December 2001

Please note usage of the Forum is subject to the Terms & Conditions.

 
Messages by Date [ Next by Date Previous by Date ]
Messages by Thread [ Next by Thread Previous by Thread ]
Post to the Forum [ New message Reply to this message ]
Printable version
 

Re: Re: [sharechat] Quiet times


From: "hugh webber" <hugh.webber@clear.net.nz>
Date: Sun, 16 Dec 2001 08:33:09 +1300


Actually, by rational analysis it should be getting the highest number of 
postings when the
investment opportunities are best i.e. high gross dividend yields, low p/e's, 
net assets per share
well above the share price, strong company profit growth. The fact that it 
doesn't shows the
unfortunate truth that Sharechat by number of postings is very much dedicated 
to momentum investing
- (also known as charting ;-).

I must compliment the parties involved on doing the analysis of would Warren 
Buffett buy WHS shares
given return on capital, growth rates and present share prices. Sharechat has 
advanced light years
from the tech bubble and I'm impressed that this sort of thing is happening. 
Roll on the same
approach to other shares.


----------
From: DR <kat47@bigfoot.com>
To: sharechat@sharechat.co.nz
Subject: Re: Re: [sharechat] Quiet times
Date: Friday, 14 December 2001 17:15

Its the same on every board.
Excitement is often just the result of an upward trend.
One board that i frequent was getting 600 postings a day at the height of the 
tech boom and 30 at
the bust. Now about 50 on a poor day and 70 on a good one
D.



----------------------------------------------------------------------------
To remove yourself from this list, please use the form at
http://www.sharechat.co.nz/chat/forum/


 
Messages by Date [ Next by Date: Re: [sharechat] Briscoes hugh webber
Previous by Date: Re: [sharechat] AIR jigsaw - a piece missing? Nick Kearney ]
Messages by Thread [ Next by Thread: [sharechat] TEL Chart Phaedrus
Previous by Thread: Re: Re: [sharechat] Quiet times DR ]
Post to the Forum [ New message Reply to this message ]