And that just goes to prove my point,
the so called experts have difficulty
stocks, so why should anyone beleive
posting on a Yahoo chat brd
have a better chance at it
? That makes no
sence at all. At least I can
Lehman Brothers and Morgan Stanley's of
world if I need to. They have a rep to
or they lose business. Does the ghost have
much at stake ? I don't think so.
In reveiwing several of yout posts,
that your not to adverse to
pumping other stocks
on this brd, while
trying to knock the price down
Now you may just be a professional
working the brds, or maybe you have personal vendetta
with RAZF. It's not important, but if your are a
professional PR man, it would be wise to
Actually, most stocks are clearly still trading
on fundamental valuations, but I guess you only
invest in the Internet stocks from your
Of course no one knows the exact future revenue and
earnings numbers, but coming up with approximate ranges
and then deciding what those numbers might be worth
today is what stock investing is all about. It sounds
to me like you are either purely trading on
technicals or just gambling.
Finally, I don't think
you should "trust" me at all. What you should do is
read my arguments, do your own research, and form your
own opinions. You really should not trust Lehman or
anyone else for a price target either. Use those reports
as a source of facts only.
People who follow
my suggestions should do so only because they agree
with the arguments after checking the facts I rely on,
not because they trust me or any other Yahoo poster.
I know you are not specifically citing Lehman's
as there are many firms out there with positive
ratings on RAZF. However, I have access to an
insitutional analyst rating service called Starmine, and the
Lehman analyst has a very poor track record - one of the
poorest around. Same with CSFB.
It's not all
negative, though. Cowen Securities' analyst in this sector
is one of the top-performers, and gives RAZF a
"buy." But, I wouldn't be touting either Lehman's or
CSFB's research as a reason to buy, as they just don't
do a very good job compared to the rest of the
field. Another top-scorer is Morgan Stanley. Merrill and
Goldman Sachs come out pretty much in the middle. FYI
you think or what your position is. Please go
ahead and short more .... be my guest. We love
What cheerleading? Unlike you, I'm never negative. And
never mention price targets. No numbers for you.
I'm in @ 34, 33 1/4, 32 1/8, 31 1/8, 29 3/8,
28 1/2,27 5/8, 27, and 26 3/4.
know my postisions.
It has been my experience
in dealing with
shorts, that they try to put
target price on an issue to try to
into selling, so they can get covered.
amazing how far off their suggested price is
analists who do this for a living.
gives RAZF a target price of
$60.00, while the
qhost, who I don't know
at all, and is just another
person on chat brds
gives it a price of $15-18.
Hummm, now who
should I base my investment
desision on ? Wow what a tough choice.
just can't decide...... I'll have to think
this for a week or two..... NOT !
To try to put
an evaluation on an issue is
very tricky. So many
factors. Even the experts
are hard pressed to come up
with acuate stats,
given the changing business
enviroment we are in. Of all the stocks trading today, how
are of them do you think are actually trading
the old traditional valuations ? Not many.
makes you think you can pinpoint a
valuation anyway ? Do you
have a crystal ball ? Do you
know exactly what
the furture has in store for RAZF
? Do you
know the exact growth rate and
projected revenue of the Euro market. If you do,
share it with us. Better yet, why don't you
CNBC and share your wisdom and knowlege with the
world. Perhaps the experts
can all retire, and let
you do market evaluations for us all.
have not posted any price target. I
don't do that.
All the stocks you list have a common trait -
their future has great and uncertain potential. There
is great potential leverage in their models, which
may lead to truly explosive growth.
stocks are being valued on models of fundamentals. The
models are based on discounting back future numbers, not
today's numbers. Companies like JDSU or QCOM have
products with great margins. It costs these companies
little to sell the "next" unit, and they can ramp up
with little added skilled labor cost. Companies like
ARBA and RNWK have largely uncertain but potentially
huge opportunities for transactional and other
revenues at very low cost. AMZN, while a weaker story, is
premised on the idea that it ultimately will be the online
shopping portal, earning fees from other merchants wanting
access to its shopping infrastructure.
which of these will pan out, we can see sales and
earnings in the future that could support present
valuations. For the reasons I have previously stated, the
FISH's future is more defined and more limited. As it
continues to come into focus, it and other econsultancies
will experience further contraction in their market
Just in case you may confuse others, I will
respond. If you read my message, you will see that I am
suggesting a target price for RAZF of $15-$18.
this is not my average basis. If you say RAZF is going
to $100, should I post "no wonder you are worried if
you bought at $100!"
As I have previously
stated, my average price was above $36. Since then, I
covered some at $27, locking in some profit. I also
posted this at the time.
Why don't you tell us
all what price you bought at?
Many would argue that stocks like AMZN, JDSU,
etc., trade at current levels because of their
potential to grow their businesses large enough to justify
their market caps. Their business models could accept
that kind of growth, and people believe their
I think ghost's point is that, even believing
RAZF's story, RAZF's business model, as an
e-consultancy, cannot experience the rapid, geometric growth
that firms like BEAS can experience.
also would say that these things can take on a life of
their own, and RAZF could turn into a trading buy at
some point. I haven't seen the kind of rapid volume
that usually indicates the market is screaming "it's