HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: alan@auntbea.austin.ibm.com (Alan R. Weiss)
Subject: Re: ***(NEW EDITION) JAPANYES;VERY POPULAR PAPER ON JAPANESE BUSINESS STRATEGY (1of2)
Date: Sun, 13 Dec 1992 17:29:57 GMT
Distribution: na
Organization: (speaking only for myself)

In article <ByxuzC.BI9@cs.columbia.edu> olasov@cs.columbia.edu (Benjamin Olasov) writes:
>In article <1992Dec8.063743.6271@netcom.com> strnlght@netcom.com (David Sternlight) writes:
>
>>To take another example, if Japan underprices (dumps) product in violation
>>of GATT just long enough to put your domestic industry out of business,
>>it's irrelevant that their "real" costs are higher than yours.
>
>To be fair, American companies also engage in this practice when it
>serves their purposes - the difference is that it's called competitive
>pricing when we do it.  Moreover .....


You have failed to cite specific examples.  Therefore, how can
anyone evaluate the merits of your argument, Ben?


>, I'm not convinced there's anything
>inherently wrong with 'dumping' in the first place - it certainly
>seems consistent with free market economics.


Obviously you have not read Louis Leclerc's paper on the subject.
A market means TRADE - buy and sell.  A one way market is no
market at all.  And, its our own damn fault.  Time to stand firm.


>  Try this: if Company 'J'
>is truly offering their goods for sale below cost, and that cost is
>also below Company 'A's cost, what would prevent 'A' from buying up
>'J's goods? 

Its called "channels of distribution."  Company A MAY be able to
sign a joint marketing agreement, or an OEM agreement -- in which
case they shut down production of their own goods, layoff workers,
demolish R & D, etc, then resell the goods.  OR, Company J chooses
to simply market through other channels - and chooses to NOT sell
to Company A.

> And if 'A' has inadequate access to capital to buy up
>'J's goods, isn't that an indication that 'A' shouldn't expect to
>compete with 'J' in this particular market in the first place?
>
>-- 
>Ben Olasov		olasov@cs.columbia.edu


No, because the keiretsus can finance deficits for a LONG, LONG time.

-- 
   _  Alan R. Weiss   IBM AWS Austin-AIX Kernel   11501 Burnet Rd, Bld 905
 _| ~-. alan%auntbea.austin.ibm.com@ibmpa.awdpa.ibm.com | Austin, TX 78758
 \, *_} auntbea.austin.ibm.com!alan@ibmpa.awdpa.ibm.com | 512-838-8281
   \(   DISCLAIMER:  Working at, not speaking for, IBM  | alan@auntbea
Newsgroups: misc.invest
From: lib@cbnews.cb.att.com (Lib)
Subject: Re: Dow Jones INDUSTRIALS
Organization: AT&T
Date: Thu, 17 Dec 1992 13:45:24 GMT


Quick question about the INDUSTRIAL average. Why are Disney, Coke,
McDonalds, JPMorgan and American Express in an Industrial average?
I know some of them got put in there to replace old soldiers like
Navistar and USX but haven't they changed the character of the Indus-
trial average? The transport and utility averages are all transport
and utility companies.

From: russg@hprpcd.rose.hp.com (Russ Grover)
Date: Wed, 9 Dec 1992 16:43:11 GMT
Subject: S&P index options ?
Organization: HP Roseville Site
Newsgroups: misc.invest


Does anyone out there know if there's a significant difference between the
options on the S&P 5000 and the S&P 100?

I'm thinking about buying some puts on a broad stock market index to hedge
against a "correction", and it seems the most heavily traded options are all
S&P 100.  But the most widely quoted index, and the one I've been watching
for years, is the S&P 500.  For options, does it really matter which one
you hold?

russg
From: agrawal@ucsb.edu (Divyakant Agrawal)
Newsgroups: misc.invest
Subject: Investment Inquiry
Date: 18 Dec 92 17:41:43 GMT
Distribution: usa
Organization: University of California, Santa Barbara

Hi:

I have started reading misc.invest only recently and therefore would like
to be excused for my naivette. I have the following questions:

1. I would like to invest in a mutual fund to start a college fund for
my two year old daughter. What is the best way of doing this -- in particular
what are the tax-implications if I start the fund as "Gifts to minors". 
Also, what funds are recommended for this long-term investement/savings
and what should be the minimum level of contribution to save for a 
"decent" education 16 years from now. 

2. I contribute towards 403(b) through my employer. Is there any advantage in
also starting an IRA in that case? Is the IRA contrbution tax-deductible?

Thanks for your indulgence. As you can see -- I can perhaps use some
"reading material". I would appreciate any pointers to good books.

divy agrawal



Newsgroups: misc.invest
From: murphy@rock.enet.dec.com ()
Subject: Re: Snapple - Does it really go public Tuesday?
Reply-To: murphy@rock.enet.dec.com ()
Organization: Digital Equipment Corporation
Distribution: na
Date: Tue, 15 Dec 1992 16:30:31 GMT


In article <BzB5AA.Kn3@acsu.buffalo.edu>, elkordy@acsu.buffalo.edu (Mohamed Elkordy) writes:
|> Path: ryn.mro4.dec.com!nntpd.lkg.dec.com!news.crl.dec.com!deccrl!caen!spool.mu.edu!agate!usenet.ins.cwru.edu!ukma!cs.widener.edu!dsinc!ub!acsu.buffalo.edu!elkordy
|> From: elkordy@acsu.buffalo.edu (Mohamed Elkordy)
|> Newsgroups: misc.invest
|> Subject: Re: Snapple - Does it really go public Tuesday?
|> Message-ID: <BzB5AA.Kn3@acsu.buffalo.edu>
|> Date: 15 Dec 92 15:49:21 GMT
|> References: <104874@bu.edu>
|> Sender: nntp@acsu.buffalo.edu
|> Distribution: na
|> Organization: UB
|> Lines: 16
|> Nntp-Posting-Host: lictor.acsu.buffalo.edu
|> 
|> vida@crsa.bu.edu (Vida Jakabhazy) writes:
|> 
|> >I was wondering if anyone knows for sure if Snapple is going public
|> >tomorrow?
|> 
|> >vida@crsa.bu.edu
|> 
|> And what would be the symbol for it and on which market.  I am playing
|> the Wall Street Journal Investment challange, and I might like to do
|> snapple IPO game.
|> 
|> 
|> thanks for the responses
|> 
|> 
|> elkordy

The info is in this weeks Barron's ---

Murph
Newsgroups: misc.invest
Subject: Re: The Future of Comptronix
From: cs101a64@ih-nxt04.cso.uiuc.edu (cs101 student)
Subject: Re: "Don't Become Fixated on Mutual Funds" - Peter Lynch
Organization: University of Illinois at Urbana
Date: Sat, 12 Dec 1992 20:40:55 GMT

In article <1992Dec10.194349.5676@cbnews.cb.att.com> lib@cbnews.cb.att.com  
(Lib) writes:
> In article <1992Dec9.192118.22637@pslu1.psl.wisc.edu>  
dbk@pslu1.psl.wisc.edu (Don Katz) writes:
> >In article <Byy7v9.9Jt@news.cso.uiuc.edu>,  
cs101a64@eng-nxt06.cso.uiuc.edu (cs101 student) writes:
> >
> >Owning the next nifty 50 is a GOOD idea. Owning last year's nifty fifty  
is a bad idea.
> >
> >|>Wall Street is infatuated with these stocks.  All it takes for a  
> >|> crash in one of these stocks is earnings that fall a few pennies shy  
of  
> >|> analysts' expectations.  It will happen sooner or later, because  
very few  
> >|> companies sustain fast growth that meets lofty expectations for many  
> >|> years.
> >
> >I am also a value investor by self-definition. I own TelMex (purchased 
> at 45) and Glaxo (purchased at 18). I consider both to be reasonable 
> investments at current levels......
> 
>   
> I agree completely. However the problem with value investing and what
> I've read of Peter Lynch (the discussion started with his article) I
> can never figure out when to SELL. For example you've lost 30% on
> your investment in Glaxo since the beginning of the year, a miserable
> performance when many of the major averages are at record high levels?
> How do you decide when to sell? wouldn't a stop-loss have saved you a
> lot of money on Glaxo instead of riding it all the way down from 35? 

Graham and Dodd had selling rules as well as buying rules.  I forget the  
exact criteria, but they would sell if the dividend is eliminated, the  
stock rises 50%, or both the earnings yield and dividend yield drop to  
half the buyable levels (Buyable means that either the dividend yield is  
2/3 that of AAA bonds or the earnings yield is at least 4/3 that of AAA  
bonds).  I haven't settled on my own selling rules yet (As a college  
freshman, I have a few years left before I will buy stocks), but I might  
sell if the stock is above book value and over 20% off its high, if both  
the earnings and dividends vanish, or if the book value is deflated to  
below my purchase price.  David Dreman recommends buying stocks with the  
lowest PE ratios and selling them when the PE's reach a certain level. 
Newsgroups: misc.invest
From: rvkl60@aus18a25.sps.mot.com (Tom Mathes)
Subject: Re: IBM Turnaround?
Organization: Motorola Inc, Austin, Texas
Distribution: usa
Date: Thu, 17 Dec 1992 15:32:21 GMT

In article <4f=wMK_00WBNQ4sGFn@andrew.cmu.edu> mj00+@andrew.cmu.edu (Mark Jakubowycz) writes:
>>To me the crucial thing is mainframes.  Mainframes are extinct (he said,
>>expecting disagreement) but many inside and outside IBM don't know it yet.
>
>
>You hit a major point. MAINFRAMES.... and for this reason IBM is dead.
>They make a different product but still think mainframes......

Yup, but they are changing.  All this painful restructuring is an
indirect admission that the mainframe business isn't growing anymore.

Mainframes are not dead yet.  The growth in them has practically stopped,
but there are still lots of transaction intensive businesses that use
them and will buy them for some time to come.

>RIP IBM

WHOA!!  The company is hurting badly, but it's a long ways from dead.
They have lots of money still, and they also can refocus.  It will be
painful, but they can do it.  IBM still has some of the best technology
in the world; they just need to capitalize on it better.

Many said Ford would die in the early 80s, along with Chrysler.  Those 
folks spoke too soon; same with IBM.  There's too much inertia there to
die off that fast, and they still have a lot of neat technology that
they can capitalize on.  Like I said, it will be painful, but hopefully
(for IBM *and* the US) they will come back strong.

Tom
From: mmoore@hpcc01.corp.hp.com (Mike Moore)
Date: Sat, 12 Dec 1992 02:01:04 GMT
Subject: Re: simple margin question
Organization: Hewlett Packard
Newsgroups: misc.invest

> could only go 50% beyond the value of these marginable stocks+cash. 

100%.  If you have $10,000 equity in stocks, then you can buy $10,000
with your margin account.

Low-priced stocks (<$3?) are many times un-marginable.  Options are
only half as marginable (you could buy $5000 in options with the
above example).

Once you are margined, there is a window in which your equity vs.
margin $ can vary.  If you break the window, you get a phone call for
more money.

> Does anyone have an opinion on margin accounts in general?

Depends on how risky an investor you really are and how much you
want invested in the market.

I make it a policy to make myself fully-margined, as I believe 
margining can multiple your profits (and, of course, losses).  Interest
is negligible, as you use the broker's call rate ('bout 7%).

Mike

Newsgroups: misc.invest
From: vahe@nexus.yorku.ca (Vahe Ohan)
Subject: Re: EARN MONEY STUFFING ENVELOPES
Organization: York University
Date: Mon, 21 Dec 1992 00:22:18 GMT

ar017@cleveland.Freenet.Edu (Nolan Whitaker) writes:


>>        If you are interested in earning a great supplemental income,
>>        stuffing envelopes. send a SASE to :
>>
>>                        STUDENT STUFFERS
>>                        348-3 W. Oak St.
>>                        West Lafayette, In.
>>                                        47906
>>
> 
>For those of you are unaware of the "stuffing envelopes" scam:
> 
>1)      You send for info
>2)      Info tells you to send $10, etc for instructions
>3)      Instructions tell you to place an ad like you responded to
>        and hope some other dope responds as you did
>4)      You lose $$$
> 
> 
>I'm sure somebody will send this person some $$$.
> 
>Don't!
>Nolan W. Whitaker

    it was in the papers 6 - 7 month ago. some people were cought and got 
  charged because of using this method to get money. its a known scam to
  the police. DONT get invloved in it.....

V Ohan
Newsgroups: misc.invest
From: paul@panix.com (Paul Gatker)
Subject: Re: What is wrong with MicroSoft ?!!!
Date: Wed, 16 Dec 1992 02:40:09 GMT
Organization: PANIX Public Access Unix, NYC


>The reason microsoft is going down is because they are under investigation from the 
>ftc for violations regading the way they market dos.  If someone has the most recent
>article, maybe they could post it.  No formal suit has been filed, to my knowledge
>as of yet.


 The reason why Microsoft might be going up in the future is that their new
network systems could usurp both Artisoft's and Novell's market share!

 

-- 
*******************************************************************
paul@panix.com                                    COMPULITE GRAPHICS
Brooklyn NY usa                                Design & Consultation
********************************************************************
Newsgroups: misc.invest
From: mrand@sdf.lonestar.org (Marc Randolph)
Subject: Re: Free Stock Newsletter By E-mail
Organization: sdf Unix, Dallas
Distribution: na
Date: Wed, 16 Dec 1992 03:02:19 GMT

In article <Bz3tIn.Lq@cs.uiuc.edu> watanabe@cs.uiuc.edu (Larry Watanabe) writes:
>[...]
>There are no funds averaging > 20% over 10 years.
           ^^
>
>-Larry Watanabe watanabe@cs.uiuc.edu

   I hope you meant to type "several" rather than "no".  CGM and 
Sit New Beginning, as well as a few others, have returned just over 20% 
avg over the past 10 years.
Newsgroups: misc.invest
From: kmcintyr@boi.hp.com (Kevin McIntyre)
Subject: Day Orders or Until Cancelled
Date: Tue, 15 Dec 1992 21:44:58 GMT
Organization: Hewlett-Packard / Boise, Idaho
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.1.4 PL6]


I was wondering what the advantages are (if any) of placing
a Day Order vs. Until Cancelled.  If you know you want a
stock at a certain price (maximum) if you place the same
buy order every day at the same price do you effectively get
"bumped" from queue?  That is, if there are X investors tring
to get stock A for $Y, only so many orders can be filled at
a time.  If on a particular day you bid $Y and "miss the purchase" 
for that day and re-bid the same price the next day, would you
have been better off to have placed an "until cancelled"?
This is regardless of any other events that might take place
during the close, etc.
				--Just Curious.


kmcintyr@hpdmd48.boi.hp.com
From: hacker@access.digex.com (Dark Hacker)
Newsgroups: misc.invest
Subject: Re: NAIC....
Date: 20 Dec 1992 06:15:39 GMT
Organization: Express Access Online Communications, Greenbelt, MD USA
NNTP-Posting-Host: access.digex.com

In article <6075@rosie.NeXT.COM> James_Conley@NeXT.COM writes:
>
>	Basically, if you've read three books on investing, you've probably  
>heard all the NAIC stuff before ...  If you're looking for heavy stock
> information, I'd recommend  >something like Technical Analysis of Stocks
> and Commodities magazine....

This brings up an interesting question.  Among the many MANY "get
rich quick" and "how to succeed" books cluttering Crown and other
book stores I wonder what book titles are good for understanding:

1) The US Economy
2) Wall Street stock trading
3) Other markets (options, futures)

Not the dry textbook stuff.  Factual yet entertaining.  Informative
yet not overwhelming in useless trivia.  It should have a sweet
bouqette with a hint of apple and... 

oops... wrong newsgroup.

Anyway.  Any favorites?  I've looked at the Barrons books on
"Finance"  "Economy" etc and gosh they're dry as sand.

- Hacker

-- 
Dark Hacker @ Black Silicon, Fortress Of Computation
hacker@black-silicon.mclean.va.us

"Life itself is... COMPUTATION!"
Newsgroups: misc.invest
From: etpeters@dal.mobil.com (E. T. Peterson(Eric))
Subject: Re: Mutual Fund Forecaster recommends Gold Funds
Organization: Mobil Exploration & Producing Technical Center(MEPTEC), Dallas. 
Distribution: usa
Date: Tue, 15 Dec 1992 18:40:54 GMT

In article <1992Dec15.171213.25362@cbnews.cb.att.com>, lib@cbnews.cb.att.com (Lib) writes:
|>    
|> The latest issue of Mutual Fund Forecaster recommends buying
|> gold funds. Says the "gold model" has gone positive. No other
|> explanation.
|>   
|> Caveat emptor.


The Mutual Fund Forecaster's "Gold Model" measures the rate of
inflation by comparing the current monthly consumer price index change
with the consumer price index change six months ago.  If the current
change is greater than the one 6 months ago, the model is bullish.

I'm not saying its a good model, just telling you what it is.

*********************************************************************
Eric Peterson                  The sooner you fall behind,
Research Geophysicist          the more time you'll have to catch up!
(214) 951-3251
etpeters@drsol1.dal.mobil.com
*********************************************************************
Newsgroups: misc.invest
From: floydb@rpi.edu
Subject: Re: cs101 student (was: Oil Futures)
Date: Mon, 14 Dec 1992 21:42:25 GMT


caught two boo-boos too late,  below:

   "owe" should be "own"


Changes the meaning of the sentences somewhat, doesn't it...

also:

   ($1,300)  should be ($130)

I have had a cash balance of under $200 and bought an option or
two, it is not entirely unreasonable.

barry

***************************************************************

In article <l9j2a+c@rpi.edu> floydb@rpi.edu writes:
>In article <1992Dec14.155738.6694@mobil.com> etpeters@dal.mobil.com (E. T. Peterson(Eric)) writes:
>>In article <Bz60nA.Dts@news.cso.uiuc.edu>, cs101a64@ih-nxt04.cso.uiuc.edu (cs101 student) writes:


stuff deleted

>Herein one sells the option to sell or sells the option to buy a fixed
>number of shares at a fixed price. Similarly, one may short-sell stock
>which is selling stock you don't owe with the hope that you will be able
>to buy it back at a lower price (sell-high buy-low vs buy-low sell-high
>(and corrallaries in the futures markets).


stuff deleted

>In the above example the investor only lost multiples of $13,000 (+-$500),
>but this may represent 100 times their cash balance ($1,300) before the
>transaction.
From: jb6k+@andrew.cmu.edu (Joel Bloch)
Newsgroups: misc.invest
Subject: Re: S&P index options ?
Date: 14 Dec 92 05:50:50 GMT
Article-I.D.: andrew.kf=_pOu00iUxE25pdU
Organization: Doctoral student, English, Carnegie Mellon, Pittsburgh, PA

It depends on the nature of your portfolio. The S&P 100 is heavily
influenced by the same stocks that make up the Dow, so if your portfolio
looks like the Dow, you can hedge against the S&P 100. If your portfolio
is more broadly based, you can hedge against the S&P 500. If you are
heavily in small cap stocks, hedging in index options may not work,
depending on how the market behaves. If everything goes down, like in a
crash, then it may work; however, if there is a divergency, then,
hedging with index options is less likely to work.
I was recently at a seminar sponsored by the Options Institute and the
speaker pointed out to me that you have to pick your spots to hedge with
index options (he was promoting using options) or it will be very
expensive. Shorting is another, perhaps complimentary way of hedging.
Newsgroups: misc.invest
From: andrew.delic@rose.com (andrew delic)
Subject: penny-stocks
Organization: Rose Media Inc, Toronto, Ontario.
Distribution: misc
Date: Wed, 16 Dec 1992 22:35:29 GMT
X-Gated-By: Usenet <==> RoseMail Gateway (v1.70)


Date Entered: 12-16-92 17:22

CU>on the regular NYSE, AMEX, NASDAQ, and OTC exchanges.  For this reason,
CU>pink sheet companies are either very new and small or about to go
CU>bankrupt.  The pink sheets are notorious for extreme risk and ties to the
CU>mob.  Thus, they are not for conservative investors or socially conscious
CU>investors.

I'm new to investing and 'playing the market' - and I recently bouught a 
pile of shares which are penny-stocks.  My financial advisor told me he
felt 'very comfortable' with this stock.

I found out (after buying the stock) that penny-stocks are extremely
dangerous and very risky.  I went for another visit to my advisor,
and he re-assured me that this company has earnings, etc, etc.

Should I be feeling safe with my money now?  After all, I am dealing
with a reputable company and a professional advisor who is in tune with
the market and knows what's going on and whats coming up, etc.

What do you think?

Andrew.
andrew.delic@rose.com
---
   DeLuxe /386 1.25 #12173  
   RM 2.00 : RoseNet<=>Usenet Gateway : Rose Media 416-733-2285
Newsgroups: misc.invest
From: watanabe@cs.uiuc.edu (Larry Watanabe)
Subject: Re: Demand for portable, intelligent devices makes who rich?
Keywords: 3 volt technology, NiMH
Organization: University of Illinois, Dept. of Comp. Sci., Urbana, IL
Date: Thu, 17 Dec 1992 18:15:48 GMT

hcb@netcom.com (H. C. Bowman) writes:


>Oh great Net.Mind:

>If one believed that the demand for products based upon 3 volt embedded
>controllers (and probably powered by NiMH battery packs) was going to
>be exceptionally strong in the next several years, what are some likely
>stock picks that he should be looking at today?

>Many thanks!

>--Cliff

>-- 
>| Cliff Bowman     |(501) 968-2232 Voice | As of 1 December, 1992, I was |
>| Electronics Wonk |(501) 964-6118 Pager | approximately $1,017,077 shy  |
>| Innovation Ind.  |(501) 968-7986 Fax   | of being a millionare.        |

You might look at the articles on Valence Technology in the
last week's Barrons. There was another article the week before,
also on Valence Technology.  I think they have some patent
for a special kind of battery.

The P/E ratio isn't too meaningful, since I think they have
yet to make their first penny. They did recently sign a 
contract with Motorola.

-Larry Watanabe watanabe@cs.uiuc.edu
From: gilman@cshl.org (Michael Gilman)
Newsgroups: misc.invest
Subject: Re: "Market efficiency" (Was Re: Rationality of the stock market (NOT!))
Date: 16 Dec 92 14:24:59 GMT
Followup-To: misc.invest
Organization: Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory

In article <1glo96INNaip@almaak.usc.edu>, ajayshah@almaak.usc.edu (Ajay
Shah) wrote:
> 
> The concept of efficient market broadly means : "all available
> information is reflected in the price".  This means that unless you
> hold special information which the market does not yet know, you can't
> make money in "responding to news".  By the time you heard that
> Microsoft is in FTC trouble, that information is already incorporated
> in the price.
> 
> "Information" above can be defined in many ways.  The most primitive
> kind of information is the history of price and returns.  Such
> information is very widely available.  It is easiest to test for
> market efficiency w.r.t. historical price information, and (as far as
> I know) nobody has yet found a chink in the efficiency armour enough
> to make money on (and there have been hundreds of attempts at testing
> market efficiency, in markets all over the world).
> 
> [anti-chartism paragraph deleted]
> 
> In a world with efficient markets, there is virtually no role for
> stock picking.  A lot of the advice that folks like Peter Lynch dish
> out are very suspect when you assimilate the notion of efficient
> markets.  Wall street types hate the proposition, because it
> eliminates the need for expensive investment managers and newsletters
> and thus directly endangers their livelihood.
> 
>         -ans.
> -- 
> Ajay Shah, (213)749-8133, ajayshah@rcf.usc.edu


This, of course, is the basic argument in favor of indexing: since the
market is so efficient, at least for large well-followed companies, you
cant beat it by stock-picking, so why pay for it?

But, heres a dumb question: Why couldnt you improve your return vs S&P 500,
for example, by simply eliminating the stocks of dying companies (IBM??)
that are still large but are almost certainly headed down the tubes? I
guess the argument would be that grim company prospects are already fully
incorporated in the market price. But, still, spotting losers in dying
industries would seem to be simpler than picking winners in growing
competitive industries.

mg
Newsgroups: misc.invest