HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: rsilver@world.std.com (Richard Silver)
Subject: Inventions upon demand
Organization: The World Public Access UNIX, Brookline, MA
Date: Tue, 8 Sep 1992 19:54:34 GMT


We are an exceedingly productive group of professional inventors in
the Boston area. We are senior scientists with outstanding credentials
(from MIT, Battelle, Gulf + Western, Raytheon, Revlon, Technion, and
more) and proven track records. If you need a product we can invent it
for you. We have introduced 100+ patents and 100+ new products and
processes into industry. Previous clients include several Fortune 500
and many small firms. We will provide low or high tech innovative
solutions to difficult and 'insoluble' problems with terms to be
arranged. Write or send email to the address below. 

Dr. Richard Silver
Box 548
Lexington, MA 02173

rsilver@world.std.com
From: kennyl@Sun.COM (Kenny Lopez - Silicon Valley EDA District Sales Rep)
Newsgroups: misc.invest
Subject: Swift Energy Oil & Gas Depository/Partnership
Date: 14 Sep 1992 20:04:18 GMT
Organization: Sun Microsystems, Inc.
Distribution: world
Reply-To: kennyl@Sun.COM (Kenny Lopez - Silicon Valley EDA District Sales Rep)
NNTP-Posting-Host: bonehead1.west.sun.com

Has anyone heard about this investment? A buddy of mine
received a cold call last week. 5 year return of investment.
After 5 years, you are a partner.

Thanks,

Kenny 


Newsgroups: misc.invest
Subject: Re: 401k Rollover Legality Question
From: gary@cdthq.UUCP (Gary Heston)
Date: Sun, 06 Sep 92 21:58:30 CDT
Organization: Garys' Home for Obsolete Computers

timlee@public.btr.com writes:

> gary@cdthq.UUCP (Gary Heston) writes:
> |jhc@m2lll.uucp (James H. Coombs) writes:
> |> The cost of keeping them separate is the additional complexity of
> |> managing multiple accounts.  I want to do one thing with my retirement
> |> money, and I don't want to have to do it twice, which also increases
> |> the commissions that I have to pay.
> |
> |I don't really see what is that much harder about having two accounts
> |in the same fund instead of one. And what will it cost--$35/year? If
> 
> If its just mutual funds, it will cost maybe $10 to $15 per year
> per IRA account.  But if the investor wants to use a brokerage
> account to invest in individual stocks and bonds, the annual fees
> may be higher, and having smaller separate accounts reduces flexibility
> and may cause commissions to increase because the investor must make
> smaller trades.

Perhaps. There area so many variables, it's not possible to make a 
blanket statement about which way to go. I'd avoid brokerage accounts
with retirement money anyway; I don't think their advice is that good.

> |If you take a 401K and roll it into a non-deferred IRA, I think it's 
> |all considered a non-deferred account at that point, and you then
> |*cannot* separate it later into deferred and non-deferred accounts.
> |If you want to make further deferred contributions, you have to open
> |another account anyway.
> 
> Have a reference to this?

No; I'm not a tax attorney, and congress has fouled up the code so badly
that the IRS has trouble figuring it out. But I *think* this is the case.

> |Another tax trap, not directly related to 401Ks but having to do with
> |deferred and nondeferred IRAs, forces you to take withdrawls proportionatly,
> |even if you've kept the accounts separate, forcing you to pay penalties
> |unnecessarily.
> 
> What penalties?

If you contribute to a non-deferred IRA, and then roll a 401k into a
deferred IRA, and want to withdraw your non-deferred contributions,
you're forced to treat the money as having come proportionally from 
*both* accounts, thereby incurring the tax/penalty on the deferred 
money in the rollover account. If the rollover account is significantly
larger than the non-deferred account, you can get screwed big time.

Gary Heston, at home....
gary@cdthq.uucp
From: bkottmann@falcon.aamrl.wpafb.af.mil (Brett Kottmann)
Newsgroups: misc.invest
Subject: Re: need details on devaluating U.S. currency
Date: 9 Sep 92 17:59:24 GMT
Organization: Logicon Technical Services, Inc.

In article <1992Sep8.091132.243@v7.vitro.com>, mzwick@vitro.com (Morris J. Zwick) writes:
> In article <JON.92Sep3170214@destin.dazixco.ingr.com>
> jon@destin.dazixco.ingr.com (Jon Stone) writes:
>>
>>I'm no expert, but I don't agree with this.
>>
>>If the dollar were de-valuated by some large amount, say 500%, then
>>your house mortgage for $100,000 yesterday would now be worth $20,000
>>in de-valuated dollars.  Obviously lending institutions would be quite
>>unhappy about this situation and demand payment indexed to this
>>devaluation (i.e.  inflation).  Presuming they could get the
>>government to go along with it.  So your house loan would now be
>>$500,000 in the devalued currency.
>>
>>I believe this is exactly what happened in post WW1 Germany.  When
>>hyper-inflation set in because of the massive devaluation of the
>>currency, banks pushed, and got, these kind of concessions from their
>>government.  From their point of view, their outstanding loans were
>>becoming worthless without such indexing.  The ordinary citizens saw
>>their debts going out of sight, and their salaries not keeping up.
>>
> 
> The key thing to note here is that Germany was suffering Hyperinflation.
> Devaluation in and of itself does not affect the value of any asset. Using your
	Only if that asset exists in a vacuum.

> example, that revalued $20,000 has the same purchasing power (assuming that the
> government enforces strictly the devaluation by forcing all prices and wages to
> change accordingly) that it had prior to the revaluation. I think this is a
> good concept, especially when inflation and interest rates are fairly low, as
> they are now.

	What you forget is that a) the dollar is an international exchange
currency and b) we trade with other countries.

	So while your 1 for 10 reverse dollar split looks good on paper, you're
forcing the rest of the world to charge more for their goods that are coming
into the US, since they were used to getting 10 dollars, and are now only
getting 1.  Their currency hasn't changed, so the exchange rate is still 1
dollar for X of their currency, only now that dollar is only worth $0.10.

	Mexico during the 70s is a perfect example of why devaluation does
nothing to help an economy.

Brett--------------------------------------------------------------------------
	"Why the courts don't tell a husband who has been living off his wife
to go out and get a job is beyond my comprehension."--Joan Lunden
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Newsgroups: misc.invest
From: slansky_d@macmail1.rtsg.mot.com
Subject: Re: Cellular frequencies, 50% ROI!?
Organization: CSG Group
Distribution: na
Date: Fri, 11 Sep 1992 20:15:05 GMT

In article <3480022@hpwrce.mayfield.hp.com> kingsley@hpwrce.mayfield.hp.com
(Kingsley Morse) writes:
>Touchtone Engineering has offered to apply to the FEC on my behalf for
>cellular phone frequencies that are being auctioned off. They say applying
>will cost $7,000 and should have about a 50% annual rate of return. It will
>be a passive investment.
>
>Has anyone heard of Touchtone Engineering or the latest FEC auction. A 50% 
>annual ROI sounds too good to be true.
>
Be very cautious here.  Cellular "frequencies" have already been assigned...by
the FCC.  Cellular coverage areas or MSA's (Metropolitan Service Areas) have
all been assigned.  Additionally, the MSA's are not auctioned off - they are
picked by random drawing from applications.  RSA's have also all been assigned
(Rural Service Areas).  There may be some opportunities to buy up future
frequency bands, but there is no existing equipment to support these bands, nor
is there a guarantee that there ever will be.....  I would be very skeptical of
this offer - I believe (And I am in the Cellular business) that all (certainly
all of the good) markets have been assigned.

Doug
Newsgroups: misc.invest
From: cep@taligent.com (Christophe Pettus)
Subject: Re: Disney stock
Organization: Taligent, a little subsidiary of two really big companies.
Date: Wed, 9 Sep 1992 23:14:09 GMT

In article <1992Sep9.190050.13696@oswego.Oswego.EDU> colburn@oswego.Oswego.EDU (Bret Colburn) writes:
>I'd be surprised if they'd sell the stock directly to you.  My guess is you'll
>have to go through a broker.  If I wrong though, I'd be interested in the
>details of how to do this.

Many companies will allow you to buy your first share of stock from
them directly, without commission (or with a trivial, <$1 commission).
Future purchases have to be from a broker.
--
-- Christophe

"Black is the color of non-conformity.  Everyone has to have it."
	T-shirt company executive
Newsgroups: misc.invest
Subject: Re: 401k Rollover Legality Question
From: gary@cdthq.UUCP (Gary Heston)
Date: Fri, 04 Sep 92 20:27:37 CDT
Organization: Garys' Home for Obsolete Computers

jhc@m2lll.uucp (James H. Coombs) writes:

> In article <BtyK5v.Bp3@apollo.hp.com> saz@apollo.HP.COM (Steven A. Zedeck) wr
> 
> >Whatever you do transfer into an IRA, you should put in into
> >a separate IRA and not mix these funds with a previously setup
> >IRA. This will give you more flexibility in moving the money around later.
> >You also shouldn't mix pre-tax dollar IRA money with post-tax dollar IRA.
> 
> Why should you keep them separate.  Everyone says to keep them
> separate, but no one says why.  What flexibility is there?  In short,
> what do we gain?!

Mostly, you gain flexibility regarding what you can do with the money
in the future. The biggest consideration is what you *avoid*, which is
a pile of brain-dead accounting headaches come tax time, thanks to our
dear Congress. 

> The cost of keeping them separate is the additional complexity of
> managing multiple accounts.  I want to do one thing with my retirement
> money, and I don't want to have to do it twice, which also increases
> the commissions that I have to pay.

I don't really see what is that much harder about having two accounts
in the same fund instead of one. And what will it cost--$35/year? If
you roll a 401K into a IRA, then contribute to the IRA, you can't roll
it into another 401K. That means you can't borrow against it, since it's
not legal to use an IRA for loan collateral. You can borrow up to half
the 401K, though, depending upon your employers' plan.

If you take a 401K and roll it into a non-deferred IRA, I think it's 
all considered a non-deferred account at that point, and you then
*cannot* separate it later into deferred and non-deferred accounts.
If you want to make further deferred contributions, you have to open
another account anyway.

Another tax trap, not directly related to 401Ks but having to do with
deferred and nondeferred IRAs, forces you to take withdrawls proportionatly,
even if you've kept the accounts separate, forcing you to pay penalties
unnecessarily.

If you don't believe the net, go see a CPA. Of course, real advice 
isn't free.

Gary Heston, at home....
gary@cdthq.uucp

Newsgroups: misc.invest
From: rot@mickie.id.macsch.com (Rohit Thukral)
Subject: Is SDRC a bargain at 10 1/2?
Reply-To: rot@mickie.id.macsch.com
Organization: MSC, Los Angeles
Distribution: usa
Date: Thu, 10 Sep 92 16:49:25 GMT


Structural Dynamics Research Corp (SDRC), an MCAE company based
in Ohio fell 4 5/8 yesterday to 10 1/2, on lower earnings 
expectations for the 3rd quarter. 

Is SDRC a good buy at this price? Other companies in the industry
have recently announced higher earnings from the year ago period.
This might account for the steep drop in SDRC's stock price.
However, SDRC is a strong player in the industry and it should
do well when the economy improves.

I'm hoping to hear from a guy at SDRC who posts occasionally in 
this newsgroup, and other people who follow the stock.

Rohit Thukral
-- 
#include <StdDisclaimer.h>
Newsgroups: misc.invest
From: suhre@meltami.dsd.trw.com (Maurice E. Suhre)
Subject: Re: need details on devaluating U.S. currency
Organization: TRW, INC.
Date: Sat, 5 Sep 1992 00:05:26 GMT

In article <1992Sep4.030208.238099@ns1.cc.lehigh.edu> jm0i@ns1.cc.lehigh.edu (JOSEPH ALOYSIUS MCVEIGH) writes:
>Actually, sorry to be a dick, but shortly prior to ending the gold
>convertibility in 1971, Nixon did "devalue" the dollar (and every other
>currency save the quasi-currency gold) by raising the price of gold from $35
>to $38 per ounce.

I remember reading somewhere that the government had already stopped
selling gold at $35 per ounce.  That is, the gold window was closed and
there were no more sales at $35.  When Nixon raised the price to $38,
then they didn't sell it at $38.  I vaguely remember a big hoo haa
about it but the situation seemed bizarre to me (but that was before
talk.bizarre :-).
-- 
Maurice Suhre
suhre@trwrb.dsd.trw.com
Newsgroups: misc.invest
From: cep@taligent.com (Christophe Pettus)
Subject: Re: Disney stock
Organization: Taligent, a little subsidiary of two really big companies.
Date: Wed, 9 Sep 1992 18:07:32 GMT

In article <1992Sep9.155127.1768@sarah.albany.edu> sysbrc@loki.albany.edu (Brian Cuttler) writes:
>The Question:  Will someone please email me the phone number for the
>correct department in Disney to get stock purchase information?

Disney Corporation's shareholder services department is at 818/505-7040.
The agent for Eurodisney bonds and the like is at 212/415-7909.
--
-- Christophe

"Black is the color of non-conformity.  Everyone has to have it."
	T-shirt company executive
Newsgroups: misc.invest
From: cs6@TorreyPinesCA.ncr.com (Eric Sit 3611)
Subject: Re: China stock market
Organization: NCR (Torrey Pines Development Center)
Disclaimer: This posting does not neccessarily reflect the opinions of NCR.
Date: Fri, 4 Sep 92 14:03:26 GMT

In article <1992Sep2.140108.2792@tamsun.tamu.edu> tpradeep@cs.tamu.edu (Pradeep K Tapadiya) writes:
>In article <1992Sep1.193638.8470@uwm.edu> xiaoqing@convex.csd.uwm.edu writes:
>>Dose anyone know if there are any mutual funds in U.S. based on the
>>stock market in China. If you know the company's names and phone numbers, 
>>please post.
>>
>
>Yesterday there was an interview on NBR with a personal from "something"
>Tiger Funds. I didn't pay much attention to the interview. Seems like
>these funds invest primarily in Asian countries including Hongkong,
>Singapore, and Malasia. I think the person being interviewed mentioned
>something about their plans for investing in China. I am almost sure
>that I heard these funds returned 24% this year and 17% last year.
>
>Will the more informed readers enlighten the net.
>
>Pradeep
>tpradeep@cs.tamu.edu

The fund is Newport Tiger Fund.  The fund invests in the developing 
countries in Asia.  Also, they do not invest in Japan.

Eric
From: bruceh@sgi.com (Bruce R. Holloway)
Newsgroups: misc.invest
Subject: Re: ? concerning SGI
Date: 11 Sep 92 20:30:04 GMT
Organization: Silicon Graphics, Inc.

In article <1992Sep11.092535.4054@desire.wright.edu> newwave@desire.wright.edu writes:
>
>  - Does Silicon Graphics have a Dividend Reinvestment program?  If so, who
>    do I call at what number?

No.  Even if we did, it wouldn't matter because we've never paid a dividend.
In other words, the business is growing fast enough that all our profit is
reinvested in expansion.

Regards, bruceh
From: mccabe@gdls.UUCP (Harold McCabe)
Newsgroups: misc.invest
Subject: Re: Effects of U.S. national debt
Summary: bad, but relative to what/who?
Date: 15 Sep 92 16:27:50 GMT
Organization: General Dynamics Land Systems, Sterling Heights, MI

In article <1992Sep12.022026.10367@ultb.isc.rit.edu>, cjb3701@ritvax.isc.rit.edu (Chris Bigenwald) writes:
> What are people's opinions on the long term effects of the national
> debt on investing?  I heard that the debt is around $15,000.00 per
> person.  I saw a clip for a video "doomsday" series available for
> purchase and it made me nervous (I only saw the ad, not the entire
> series of videos.)
> 
> Perhaps gold is a good long-term investment rather than stocks?
> 
> - Chris

I believe the long-term effects of high national debt include:

 1. Transfer of US wealth to other nations.

    As other nations finance US debt, they will receive the interest on
    the debt.  When other nations refuse to finance the US debt, then
    the cost of borrowing to the US government will rise, and the US
    will finance a proportionately larger portion of the national debt
    (US citizens and institutions).  So, when other nations refuse to
    finance the US debt, #2 below will be exacerbated.

 2. Economic inefficiencies in the US, relative to nations that do not
    carry a high-level of debt for long times.

    When a nation over a long period of time spends money on debt interest
    rather than on useful things like bridges, research, etc. it seems
    inevitable that the nation will have an inefficient economy.  Question:
    are there any industrialized nations that do not have a national debt?

 3. The US dollar may not be the universal medium of international trade
    that it is today.

    If others have doubts about the soundness/stability of the US dollar,
    they may stop denominating trade in terms of the US dollar.  Today
    oil is traded in dollars.  If there is a US dollar crisis, then oil
    producing nations and traders might trade oil in some other currency.

Can I back-up my statements with proven economic laws?  No, I'm not an
economist -- I have a real job :-)

Harold McCabe
From: timlee@public.btr.com
Newsgroups: misc.invest
Subject: Re: 401k Rollover Legality Question
Date: 7 Sep 92 17:36:30 GMT
Reply-To: timlee@btr.com (Timothy J. Lee)
Followup-To: misc.invest
Distribution: usa

gary@cdthq.UUCP (Gary Heston) writes:
|If you contribute to a non-deferred IRA, and then roll a 401k into a
|deferred IRA, and want to withdraw your non-deferred contributions,
|you're forced to treat the money as having come proportionally from 
|*both* accounts, thereby incurring the tax/penalty on the deferred 
|money in the rollover account. If the rollover account is significantly
|larger than the non-deferred account, you can get screwed big time.

Hmmm, still don't follow you.  Let's try an example:

You make $2000 of non-deferred contribution to an IRA.
You make $20000 of deferred contributions to an IRA (including rollovers
	from 401k/403b/etc.).
The investments gain $10000 by the time you withdraw (assume you are
	59+1/2 or older by that time).
So you have $2000 of basis in your IRA and $30000 of money which is
	taxable on withdrawl.
My reading of IRS Publication 590 indicates that if you withdraw any
	money from any of the IRAs described above, 15/16ths of it
	is taxed, while 1/16th of it is assumed to come from the basis
	and not taxed.

The only "penalty" I see is not being able to withdraw the nontaxable
basis amount first; it doesn't appear to penalize the fully deferred
contributions and earnings.  Or is there something new, something I
don't get, or something in error in IRS Publication 590?

--------------------------------------------------------------------
Timothy J. Lee                 timlee@btr.com  ...!decwrl!btr!timlee
This message comes with no warranty, not even an implied warranty of
fitness for any particular purpose.
From: costin@tmmb.uucp (Costin Rizan)
Newsgroups: misc.invest
Subject: Re: Stock quotes on-line
Date: 16 Sep 92 02:18:42 GMT
Organization: The Money Markets Bbs, Montreal,Qc,Canada

weenie@yenta.alb.nm.us (Dean Kerl) writes:
>
> bert@terzon.uucp (Bert Campbell) writes:
> >To put it in the simplest terms, the major exchanges copyright the
> >data.  As ludricous as it seems, they seem to control the legal right
> >to the dissemination of this information.  I know for a fact that if
> >you use a quotation monitor (there are several available that
> >get real-time stock trade data from FM subcarrier, satellite, cable, etc)
> >that you must agree that you will not redistribute the data via
> >electronic means, and the "exchange fees" are a substantial portion
> >of the cost.  There have been several "quote servers" and such
> >that pop up from time to time, but none seem to last.  I assume that
> >Clarinet has worked out the legalities of what it is doing.
> 
> I'm not positive, but I think stock quotes are protected for 15 mins
> and then they become public domain. That is why CNN can run stock
> quotes with a 15 minute delay. Since stock quotes are facts, I don't
> see how they can be protected other than for the first 15 minutes
> from the time of the trade.

        You'd be surprised. I was asking about it on Genie a few months
        back. Surpisingly enough they consider their stock quotes to be
        copyrighted material. Mind you, I don't know if they really have
        any grounds but are you ready to go to court over that? It would
        be cheaper to actually get a commercial license from one of the
        carriers.

        If this copyrighting trend continues we won't be able to breathe
        without infringing on someone's 'moral or intellectual property'


BTW This message is (c) from Costin industries. Anybody reading this
should send me 5$ bux whithin 30 days!

Later,
Newsgroups: misc.invest
From: sullivan@brandx.enet.dec.com ()
Subject: Re: Info on Selling non-public stock
Reply-To: sullivan@brandx.enet.dec.com ()
Organization: Digital Equipment Corporation, Maynard, Massawhat?
Distribution: usa
Date: Mon, 14 Sep 1992 12:52:07 GMT

What if there is a restriction that states that the stock owner can only sell
it back to the company, and the company won't buy it back?  Can one then
declare
the stock worthless and take a capital loss on his/her tax return?  
Newsgroups: misc.invest
From: nfs@kastle (Norbert Schlenker)
Subject: Re: Make 20-38% in Stock Market / year
Originator: news@nimaster
Organization: Princeton University, Dept. of Computer Science
Date: Sat, 5 Sep 1992 16:41:37 GMT

In article <2260009@hpldsla.sid.hp.com> markc@hpldsla.sid.hp.com (Mark Cervarich) writes:
>[discussion of Rockefeller Properties and its high yield]

It has a high yield because most people don't think the dividend is
very safe.  If they cut their dividend in half next quarter and then
in half again three months later and then omit it after that, what
happened to your 17%?  Forget about the dividend for a few minutes and
think hard about whether you want to own an equity stake in aging and
heavily mortgaged midtown Manhattan office buildings.  If you're
convinced the market will recover within a few years, you are justified
in holding your position or even adding to it; if not, sell or leave it
alone.

>Here's my idea:  Buy 100 shares each of 5-6 companies. (Should cost around
>$5-7K.  With a yield of greater than 20%, I will make over $1000 a year
>in dividends (before taxes and sales commissions.)  I plan on re-evaluating
>which stocks I own at least once/quarter.

You'll make the income as long as the companies keep paying.  The
market price tells you that most people think the companies cannot
keep paying.  Do you know more about these companies than the general
public?  (This is not a rhetorical question; you have to answer it, at
least to yourself.)

>Is this feasable way to make $$$$$$ (I realize there is risk involved, but
>hey, I'm 22 -- I can afford it at my age)

No, looking only at yields is not a feasible way to make $$$$$.  At
22, you are entitled to risks, but it is silly to take risks like this
without knowing more.  If you're really interested, ask the companies
for their most recent annual reports and go read their Value Line
pages at the library.  If you still think they look like plausible
investments, take the plunge.

Norbert
nfs@cs.princeton.edu