% | $
Quotes you view appear here for quick access.

Dense-Pac Microsystems (DPAC) Message Board

you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the posts
  • Fanofstan Fanofstan Jul 27, 2000 3:34 PM Flag


    on the same page when it comes to dpac. I have
    been in dpac since 1996 and have made an absolute
    killing. I have always kept my core holdings and had a
    nice chunk of trading stock. Like you I kept advising
    caution and thought that a trading range of 11-13 was
    I also think we will see the mid twenties in
    the next 6-9 months. I think this flushing out of
    short term traders will make the stock trade more
    evenly. I hear you are a Jersey native I am originally
    from Pittsburgh. I think we should chat about some
    other stocks we might be able to share some insight on.
    I also think Weisel has done an admirable job. I
    have to laugh at some of these "stock experts" that
    buy a stock after a 140% run up. Then it corrects and
    all of a sudden their are conspiracy theories nad
    calls for an investigation. A stock trading at 7 with a
    price target of 16 is a strong buy. A stock trading at
    16 with an 18 dollar target is a buy if that. Pure
    and simple. Anyone looking to get rich quick is on
    the wrong board. 100% a year works for me.

    SortNewest  |  Oldest  |  Most Replied Expand all replies
    • maybe you are right, but since when do price
      target's mean





      I personlly welcome the somewhat modest target
      given by thomas and friends. The big targets always
      seem to falter over the long term! I WELCOME what TW

      • 1 Reply to cosonostraxxx
      • article I just read at . Good read.
        Exactly what we have been talking about.

        There are
        two problems with analyst ratings. First, a rating is
        often based on a price target, which is a guess at
        where the stock will be trading within the next six to
        12 months. Fools know that no one can accurately
        predict the market's movements in the short term, let
        alone a stock's exact future value.

        the system is infected by a serious conflict of
        interest. Brokerage firms do more than research companies
        and make goofy commercials. They also provide
        consultation and investment banking services to corporations.
        That means BIG bucks. For example, 32 percent of
        Goldman Sachs' revenue for the first half of this year
        was derived from investment banking services. That's
        why you won't see many "sell" ratings: Brokerages
        don't want to alienate potential clients by talking
        smack about their stocks. (In fact, many firms don't
        even have a rating below the "hold"/"neutral" status,
        while others choose a softer phrase such as
        "speculative" instead of "sell.")

        Earlier this year,
        Borders Group hired Merrill Lynch as a consultant. On the
        same day, a Merrill Lynch analyst raised his rating on
        the company. Coincidence?