HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: rmandel@bu.edu (Richard Mandel)
Newsgroups: misc.invest
Subject: Re: Could someone talk to me about Novell (NOVL-OTC)
Date: 21 Dec 92 21:02:36 GMT
X-Newsreader: Tin 1.1 PL5

matthew bohnert (bohnert@leland.Stanford.EDU) wrote:
: Hi gang,
: 
: As many have noticed, Novell's stocked got whacked bad last week after 
: reporting `disappointing' earnings that were lower than street expects
: by 0.01/share.  I've made some decent pin money by trading short-term
: on these kinds of plays, buying within 1 week or so after the loss,
: holding for  ~1 month or so until the price creeps back up to its previous
: level.  Yeah, I know, NOVL is still expensive, but I'm on about a 75% win
: streak over the past 2 years with this strategy....
: 
[deleted]
: 
	I recently read that when a stock takes a big hit because of 
earnings disappointment, a month later it will on average be down an amount
equal to the initial loss and after three months it will have regained
only 5% of the total loss.  By this rule of thumb, buying stock that 
have takne big hits is not a winning strategy.



--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Richard Mandel			|	E-mail address: rmandel@acs.bu.edu
Boston Univ. School of Medicine	|	Phone No. 617-638-4512	
Boston, MA 02118		|	Fax No. 617-638-4085
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Newsgroups: misc.invest
From: jli@bingham.utah.edu (Jianliang Li)
Subject: ~~~~~~~ CHINA ECONOMY GROWTH: 12% ~~~~~~~ 
Organization: University of Utah
Date: Thu, 31 Dec 92 22:52:52 GMT


	The Salt Lake Tribune reported today that the economy growth in 
	mainland China is 12% for 1992.  A 5-10% growth rate for the next
	few years are expected IF political stability is not a problem.

JLi
Newsgroups: misc.invest
From: tkevans@eplrx7.es.duPont.com (Tim Evans)
Subject: Re: >>>>>> Novell to buy USL
Reply-To: tkevans@eplrx7.es.dupont.com
Organization: DuPont Engineering Physics Laboratory
X-Newsreader: NN version 6.4.19
Date: Mon, 28 Dec 1992 15:37:37 GMT

ssimmons@convex.com (Steve Simmons) writes:

>> However, as I posted earlier, this move by Novell is basically a symptom
>> of the pressure Microsoft is applying to them.  They are desperate.  It
>> is my unqualified opinon that this move will destroy Novell just as 
>> Borland is suffocating from their purchase of AT.

>Good point; however, there is one main difference.  The FTC is watching 
>Microsoft very closely now and Microsoft may be divided into smaller
>pieces.  This may even kill Windows/NT.  As we all know, a product is 
>more likely to be killed by negative externalities then for good 
>technical reasons. 

Today's Baltimore Sun suggests that the Novell/USL merger will
create a company large enought to compete effectively with
Microsoft, and that the Government may just drop its anti-
trust investigation of Microsoft.
-- 
Tim Evans                     |    E.I. du Pont de Nemours & Co.
tkevans@eplrx7.es.dupont.com  |    Experimental Station
(302) 695-9353/7395           |    P.O. Box 80357
EVANSTK AT A1 AT ESVAX        |    Wilmington, Delaware 19880-0357
Newsgroups: misc.invest
From: waddell@eeyore.nas.nasa.gov (Harry W. Waddell)
Subject: Re: Supercomputer picks for '93
Keywords: Cray, Fujitsu, IBM
Organization: NAS Program, NASA Ames Research Center, Moffett Field, CA
Date: Tue, 22 Dec 92 03:34:40 GMT

In article <BzMIuI.Bs7@ux1.cso.uiuc.edu>, krol@ux1.cso.uiuc.edu (Ed Krol) writes:
|> There is also Intel are they still in the supercomputer business?
|> 
Yes. They are coming on strong in the "modestly" parallel supercomputer
market. 

Harry 
waddell@nas.nasa.gov

If you don't like what I say, blame me, not NASA!
Newsgroups: misc.invest
From: titmas@chdasic.sps.mot.com (Eric Titmas)
Subject: Re: Condemned by Barron's--Is it significant????
Organization: SPS
Distribution: usa
Date: Wed, 30 Dec 1992 00:33:13 GMT

In article <calinski.725654700@calspan.com>, calinski@calspan.com (Peter J. Calinski) writes:
|> In <1992Dec23.224630.15657@gumby.dsd.trw.com> suhre@meltami.dsd.trw.com (Maurice E. Suhre) writes:
|> I can't, what I do know is that in these two cases (Conseco and Marvel) the
|> market seemed to feel that Barrons was wrong.  What I was looking for in
|> my post was if others could recall cases where Barrons trashed a company and 
|> then what happened later - long term - to the stock.
|> 
|> Maybe we could establish a track record on Barrons.

Barron's trashed ZZZBEST and the stock went to $0 and the founder was put in jail.
-- 
Eric Titmas      Motorola ASIC       titmas@chdasic.sps.mot.com               

It is impossible to take in more money than Congress can spend.  - Thomas Sowell
Newsgroups: misc.invest
From: djc@frieda.mitre.org (Daniel J. Coyne)
Subject: Re: SunMicro?
Organization: Research Computer Facility, MITRE Corporation, Bedford, MA
Date: Thu, 24 Dec 1992 13:57:16 GMT

In article <25610009@hpgrla.gr.hp.com> edb@hpgrla.gr.hp.com (Ed Beshore) writes:
>I think there is a fundamental flaw looking at MIPS as a meaningful metric.
>The fact is, over 90,000,000 PC users use Intel architecture only because
>the useful applications run on it.  80% of those are completely satisfied
>by the performance from a 25 Mhz 386.  Cost of hardware, preservation of
>investment and applications are the issues that make or break hardware
>vendors in the volume markets.  By any reasonable comparison, scientific/ 
>workstations is niche compared to desktop.

The problem is that a 25 Mhz 386 will collapse under
the weight of NT.  I personally believe that NT is
just a joint Microsoft-Intel effort to obselete all
386 machines in one stroke and force users to buy
486 or higher machines.  It seems like a good
marketing strategy for Intel not Microsoft.

--
 Dan Coyne -- The MITRE Corporation
 djc@mitre.org
Newsgroups: misc.invest
From: suhre@meltami.dsd.trw.com (Maurice E. Suhre)
Subject: Re: Condemned by Barron's--Is it significant????
Organization: TRW, INC.
Distribution: usa
Date: Wed, 23 Dec 1992 22:46:30 GMT

In article <calinski.725123521@calspan.com> calinski@calspan.com (Peter Calinski) writes:
>I'm not a regular reader of Barron's but, in the past year, I know of two 
>stocks, Marvel and Conseco, that were bashed by Barron's. Of course, in 
>both cases, the stock fell a considerable amount.  However, also in both cases,
>within a year, both subsequently hit new highs.

I am a regular reader of Barron's and have been for years.  What I
frequently see is that a stock will be trashed in "Up and Down Wall
Street".  Alan Abelson (or his staff) will simply point out facts
and/or possibilities.  These items suggest that the market is
overvaluing the particular stock under discussion.  They also make for
very entertaining reading (if you don't own the stock :-).

For example, sometimes a stock is selling for "100 times next years
*sales* -- forget about earnings as there aren't any" [This isn't an
exact quote, but the sort of thing you read.]  Or there may be major
competition about to fire up.  Or the earnings would have been flat or
negative if it hadn't been for a reduced tax rate.  Or some expenses
are being amortized over a 10 year period and that leaves 12 million in
liabilities still sitting on the books.  Or ....  You get the idea.
Assuming that the Barron's research is impeccable (and based on the
quickness of the legal profession to jump on the libel bandwagon I would
expect that, lest they get their collective asses sued off :-), it's
bound to influence some people.  Also, as others work out that the stock
drops because of a Barron's hit, they will learn to run for cover too.

Now it may turn out that these really are good companies, that their
profits and sales will continue to increase, the competition won't rear
its ugly head, etc.  On these assumptions, it is easy to see that the
stock drops to a point where its price more nearly reflects the best
estimate of the prospects.  If the company continues to prosper, then
the stock will rise from there.

I don't see how you can be sure that stocks which slide because of
Barron's are going to recover and continue advancing.

I think I'd buy Barron's just for the Abelson column even if I wasn't
interested in investing.  It's sort of like the Louis Ruykeyser
monologue :-)
-- 
Maurice Suhre
suhre@trwrb.dsd.trw.com
From: marvit@cattell.psych.upenn.edu (Peter Marvit)
Newsgroups: misc.invest
Subject: Re: penny-stocks
Date: 30 Dec 92 23:15:13 GMT
Organization: Psychology Dept, U. Pennsylvania
In-reply-to: daniel@hpfcso.FC.HP.COM's message of 17 Dec 92 22:01:05 GMT

Just a speculation (ahem)... MAI Basic Four (now known as MAI Systems)
seems to be "stably" swinging between 1/8 and 3/16 for the past several
months.  One could actually earn some nice pin money playing the daily
swing. Due to low volume for that stock, you probably wouldn't buy huge
amounts anyway, so you wouldn't lose much if it went belly up completely.
On the other hand, you could earn 20-35% after commissions with proper
timing. 

	-Peter "still a bit chicken" Marvit


--
: Peter Marvit <marvit@cattell.psych.upenn.edu>                            :
: Psychology Department,  University of Pennsylvania                       :
: 3815 Walnut St., Philadelphia, PA  19104  w:215/898-9208  h:215/387-6433 :
From: rlcarr@animato.network23.com (Rich Carreiro)
Newsgroups: misc.invest
Subject: Re: street name vs delivery
Distribution: usa
X-NewsSoftware: GRn 1.16f (10.17.92) by Mike Schwartz & Michael B. Smith
Date: 28 Dec 92 23:46:58 EST
Organization: The Other Side of Life

Regarding the scenario that someone gives about A owning 55% of XYZ,
and B owning 45% of XYZ, and B trying to take XYZ over by selling 1/3 of
his XYZ short against the box to C, thus apparently giving B and C 60% of
XYZ, allowing them to take it over:

This cannot happen.

Reasons:

(1) To sell short, stock must be borrowed.  One of the rules on short
    sales is that THE STOCK CANNOT BE BORROWED FROM THE SHORT SELLER.
    So, unless A has some of its stock in a margin account, there is
    *no one* from which B can borrow stock to make the short sale.
    If A holds its shares in a cash account or holds certificates, B
    will be unable to make a short sale of any kind in this scenario.
    Also, if A does have its shares in a margin account (thus providing
    the only possible source of stock for B to borrow), it can (after paying
    off any debit balance) transfer those shares back to a cash account or take
    delivery at any time (i.e. call in the stock loan).  If this happens,
    B has no choice but to cover his short position in order to deliver the
    borrowed shares back to A.  So if A noticed a takeover attempt, it could
    immediately kill it by calling the shares back.  In fact, this could 
    really hammer B by potentially catching B in a short squeeze.  If C
    for some reason decided to hold onto his shares, B would have no way
    of buying back the borrowed stock and would be subject to Bad Things(tm).

(2) Quoting from _The Stock Market (4ed)_:
    "It is, of course, impossible to create more votes for common stockholders
    merely because someone has choses to sell a company's stock short.  In
    that many stockholders, like voters evereywhere, do not choose to exercise
    their franchise, it is usually no problem for a brokerage firm to 
    provide voting proxies for all its customers who choose to vote.
    "In the rare, but highly publicized cases, where there are battles for
    control and almost every stockholder chooses to vote, it may be necessary
    for a short seller to cover his position merely because a proxy cannot
    be found for him.  Like all corners, such circumstances are interesting
    but not usual."

-- 
Rich Carreiro                                  Home: (401)841-8514
rlcarr@animato.network23.com
uunet.uu.net!animato!rlcarr
Newsgroups: misc.invest
From: jmemon@shearson.com (Janine Memon)
Subject: Re: Oil Futures
Organization: Lehman Brothers, NY
Date: Tue, 22 Dec 1992 21:17:05 GMT

In article <2387@sdrc.COM> pmchapm@sgipm3.sdrc.com (john chapman) writes:
>Keywords: 
>
>A friend of mine had an interesting idea, and I thought I might get 
>some opinions on it.  It seems that during the gulf war, the price
>of oil per barrel shot up to $45 or so from around $18.  Now, its 
>nearer to the $18 per barrel price I think.   His plan was to invest
>a couple hundred bucks into oil futures hoping that Saddam would
>get cocky and pull something as soon as Clinton steps in.  I'm not
>sure how he calculated this, but he said that if the price went to 
>just $35 per barrel, a $100 investment would soar to the multiple 
>thousands in value.  Could someone verify or nullify this calculation,
>and voice some opinions on the plan as a whole?
>
>Thanks,
>John
>
I do not believe, when investing in oil futures that it is possible to 
invest only $100. I'm only familiar with treasury futures and the like
but I know that these futures are sold in contracts and that the contracts tend to be 
in very large sizes. 


					Janine


--
Janine N. Memon				| All views expressed here are my own  
Lehman Bros, Inc.			| and should not be confused with those 
Amex Tower, World Financial Center	| of my employer.
New York, N.Y.				| email address jmemon@shearson.com
Newsgroups: misc.invest
From: vvsvdoc@lims01.lerc.nasa.gov (MICHAEL SEESE)
Subject: Re: 401k Distribution
News-Software: VAX/VMS VNEWS 1.41    
Organization: NASA Lewis Research Center
Date: 22 Dec 1992 08:29 EST  

Unfortunately, Uncle Sam has figured out a way to stop your friend from 
doing exactly what you describe.  Under a new law, if you cash in a 401k    
(that is to say, a check actually touches your hands) the government takes 
20 percent and conveniently holds it for you.  (And in fact, I believe you 
won't get a check back -- I think they use it as income tax credit).

Further, when your friend opens his new 401k, he MUST repay the 20% out of 
his own pocket, or face the standard taxes and penalties.  The only way to 
avoid this happening is to either roll the 401k directly into his new 
company's plan (perhaps his old employer will let him maintain the account 
until he establishes the new one), or to have the money sent directly to an 
IRA.

You've got to love that government of ours -- taxes us for using OUR OWN 
MONEY!
From: hensel@oswego.Oswego.edu
Newsgroups: misc.invest
Subject: Futures Options
Date: 23 Dec 92 21:22:45 GMT
Reply-To: hensel@oswego.Oswego.edu ()
Distribution: na
Organization: Instructional Computing Center, SUNY at Oswego, Oswego, NY
Originator: hensel@sherman.oswego.edu

I am think of opening a futuers account and am in need of some information.

What is the difference between a futures index option and an index option.

What are the margin requirements for writting futures index options?

How are futures index options settled when they are exercised against you?

If anyone has any of this information would greatly appreciate it


Thanks Ken
From: rteasdal@polyslo.csc.calpoly.edu (Rusty)
Newsgroups: misc.invest
Subject: Small-scale stock price manipulation?
Date: 4 Jan 93 05:34:18 GMT
Organization: Cal Poly San Luis Obispo, CSc Department


	
	Now here's an interesting question, which I throw out in
hopes that someone may be able to shed some light on the topic:

	For some time now, I have been taking occasional notice
of small outlying trades while watching the ticker roll. Usually 
these trades are either above or below the current bid/ask range
by a small percentage, and they are rarely more than a hundred-share
round lot in size.

	I was mystified by this for months, assuming at first that
they were simply the result of ignorant small investors entering
blind trades away from a quote source, or some such thing. However,
an alternative explanation has recently suggested itself.

	Could these types of trades be a price manipulation effort
of sorts? To elaborate, consider the following scenario: I'm a 
hypothetical investor with a large position in XYZ, which is just
beginning a strong upmove. I can artifically create the appearance
of stronger demand than actually exists, by the expedient of making
a small purchase some distance above the current bid price. 

	This trade will be recorded as the high of the day; in fact,
in a thinly traded, illiquid OTC issue, if I entered it just before
the end of the trading day, it has a high probability of being recorded 
as the close. This will make the issue appear attractive to chartists
and the like, augmenting its price appreciation potential in the next
day's trading. If properly done, this might be quite profitable.

	Or, alternatively, consider this: I know from experience that
many small investors like to take positions in stocks whose chart
behavior suggests a basing pattern with an upside breakout in the
works, and many of these positions are protected by stop-loss orders
set anywhere from five to twenty percent below the base, depending on
the volatility of the issue's trading.

	What's to stop me from picking such a stock, taking a short
position, and then helping it along by entering a single small sale
at a low price level sufficient to fire a number of stops? In certain
situations, I'd think that a single adroitly timed such trade might
be able to catalyze a selling wave, triggering several levels of stops
in succession, like a gunshot setting off an avalanche.

	This seems eminently practicable. My question, though, is whether 
it's even legal to pull this kind of stunt. Could one expect a knock on
the door by the SEC after a few such trades? Does it constitute illegal
manipulation of securities prices? On the one hand, it does seem to be
exactly that, manipulative. On the other, it is after all a free market 
for the most part, and one ought to be able to sell or buy at whatever
price one chooses within it, mais non?







-- 
||||||||   Russ Teasdale -- rteasdal@polyslo.CalPoly.EDU  --  (Rusty)  ||||||||
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"Gentlemen, if we do not succeed, then we run the risk of failure." - D. Quayle
From: jm0i@ns1.cc.lehigh.edu (JOSEPH ALOYSIUS MCVEIGH)
Newsgroups: misc.invest
Subject: Re: Cassie Seifert
Date: 22 Dec 92 18:07:49 GMT
Organization: Lehigh University


schindler@csa2.lbl.gov writes:
>>Trivia question:  Do you recognize the name Cassie Seifert?
>
>>Is this most-excellent babe from the Nightly Business Report married?

calinski@calspan.com (Peter Calinski) writes:
>Hey forget Cassie, what about Sue Herara (sp) from CNBC, much more
>most-excellent.

I'm a Terry Keenan man myself. [CNN/Moneyline]

-- 
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Joseph Aloysius McVeigh | "No one would remember the Good Samaritan if he'd
   jm0i@.Lehigh.edu     |  only had good intentions. He has money as well."
       "N.I.N.A."       |                               - Margaret Thatcher
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Newsgroups: misc.invest
From: pngai@adobe.com (Phil Ngai)
Subject: Re: AMD - what's your opinion?
Organization: Adobe Systems Incorporated
Date: Sun, 3 Jan 1993 21:17:15 GMT

In article <1992Dec31.155315.6351@mailer.cc.fsu.edu> meyers@lorenz.ocean.fsu.edu (Steve Meyers) writes:
>  How does their recent loss in the courts affect their ability to 
>market their Am386? I have the impression their sales (and profits) 
>will come to a rapid halt.

It doesn't directly affect it. Intel is trying to appeal the results of
"binding arbitration" that they had previously agreed to abide by.
They had previously tried twice (via CA Appeals and CA Supreme) to get
the judge/arbitrator removed after he started expressing sympathy for
AMD but failed completely. After the arbitrator finished and had the
results ratified by the Superior Court and AMD was granted complete
rights to the Am386, Intel then started trying to appeal that.  Their
first appeal was thrown out with comments to the effect of "you want to
appeal binding arbitration? get out of here".  They then went shopping
for another court (Federal this time, I think) to file another appeal
in. This seems to still be pending.

If Intel does get the arbitration results altered, AMD might be in a
difficult position with regard to Am386 microcode. This seems unlikely
right now, but then, so did the loss of their access to 486 microcode.
However, the market for the 386 will probably shrink rapidly and make
this all a moot point, unless Intel can get a judgement for damages for
product already sold.

The shrunk 486SX with triple level metal seems to be priced very
attractively compared to the Am386. Intel is probably willing to sell
them with less than normal margins to maintain this in the face of
whatever pricing moves AMD might make. There are also products like
NextStep coming out which are advertised as 486 only. If I were Intel,
I would have "encouraged" Next to do this. Perhaps Microsoft will do
a 486 only Windows too...


-- 
My opinions are my own.
From: rymon@linc.cis.upenn.edu (Ron Rymon)
Newsgroups: misc.invest
Subject: Need Broker with GOOD PRICES (ONLINE service preferred)
Date: 22 Dec 92 13:47:41 GMT
Organization: University of Pennsylvania


 The header says it all.

 Need phone numbers, and maybe personal recommendations.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Computer and Information Science               Tel. (215) 898-0326 (office)
University of Pennsylvania                          (215) 626-0794 (home)
Suite C, Rm 419, 3401 Walnut St, Phila, PA 19104    (215) 898-0587 (fax)
Newsgroups: misc.invest
From: sysbrc@loki.albany.edu (Brian Cuttler)
Subject: Genentech
Keywords: doing well - why
Organization: State University of New York at Albany
Date: Tue, 29 Dec 92 14:49:31 GMT

I somehow picked a stock (and held) a stock that is going up.  Can 
someone tell me what I did right - or is the market just betting on
the preferences of the new administration?

						thanks,

						Brian


-- 
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 Brian R Cuttler                 |        bitnet:    sysbrc@albnyvms
 Senior System Programmer        |        internet:  sysbrc@uacsc1.albany.edu
 State Univ of NY at Albany      |        phone:     518-442-3906
Newsgroups: misc.invest
From: georgec@eng.umd.edu (George B. Clark)
Subject: Re: Need Broker with GOOD PRICES (ONLINE service preferred)
Date: Wed, 23 Dec 92 13:52:54 GMT
Organization: University of Maryland
Distribution: usa


E-Trade has good online services, and they have the lowest commissions
of any broker I'm aware of. I have an account with them, and I wouldn't
do business with any other broker. You will find their ads in Barron's.

No e-mail, please.
Newsgroups: misc.invest
From: brownr@hydra.rtp.dg.com (Randy Brown)
Subject: Re: 401(k) maximums (Was Re: What good is a non-deductible IRA?)
Date: Thu, 31 Dec 92 20:33:25 GMT
Distribution: usa
Organization: DG-RTP Graphics Group
Followup-To: misc.invest

In article <ljuvr9INNofj@Sun.COM>, tut@cairo.Eng.Sun.COM (Bill Tuthill)writes:
|> 
|> If you have access to one, a 401(k) or 403(b) is superior because they
|> are fully deductible, have higher maximums and no salary cap, and often
|> provide loan provisions.  If you are self-employed, a Keogh is better
|> because it is fully deductible.

Well, if they limit it to 15% of earnings, you hit the 7500 maximum at 50K 
earnings.   I agree with your original statement (since anybody can 
contribute up to 15% or ~7500 in '93), but I was wondering what other
companies 401(k) programs' limits are like.

Ours is 15%/7500 for '93, with no employer contribution.  3 funds to
select from (one guaranteed, two mild equity funds).

Thanks.
Randy