| Topic Name: |
liz ann sonders |
| Message Name: |
OK someone answer this: |
| Date Posted: |
02/15/2006 |
| In Reply To: |
Hey sucker lover,
Do you kick puppies?
|
| Message: |
Many stocks here are rated "A", "B", "C", "D" and "F". This is done primarily by mathematical formulas. The company makes sales to the public, based on the idea that there is a rational (mathematical) approach to pick stocks.
(It USED to be, of course, that the company made NO claims on the merit of any individual stock. They cast aspersions at the idea, that you could know the worth of a stock through broker analysis. But I guess times changed.)
So while there is a "proprietary system" making headlines in Barron's, there is also this saleswoman going around like some 1990's guru. And in fact, she was a "guru" in the 1990's. Pitching bubble or high PE growth stocks in Campbell Cowperthwait.
"International" is the no-brainer strategy. Everyone says "international". That is not any great insight.
Moreover, such stock selection runs counter to the "proprietary system" (A, B, C, and so forth) that Schwab also pitches.
So which is it?
Why don't ET and AMTD also have their "star" gurus out front-and-center?
Call it what you will. But you should--working in a Legal Department--be able to distinguish a person deriding business strategy that says and does two opposite things. Versus alleged "professional jealousy".
Companies use pretty women all the time to pitch their products, regardless of whether these women are involved in the development of the the product. Happens all the time. Soft drinks, automobiles, etc.
Shareholders who lost a lot of money in the stock (including most of the remaining Schwab community workers) really deserve better treatment.
I'd like to know your thoughts about the Bush Tax Panel and if the company's role in that really led to any increase in shareholder value.
Or even what happened to the Bush Tax Panel report.
|
|
