Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: SirLinksalot
The NASDAQ probably won't get back to that level for at least another 15 years.

You're not soiling the party, either. Anyone who got screwed when the NASDAQ collapsed was clearly over-exposed to high-risk stocks that any investor with even a modicum of financial sense would have stayed away from.

Yes, my technology-oriented mutual funds lost about 65% of their value in 2000. But since they only comprised about 15% of my portfolio it wasn't such a big deal. And anyone who has been dollar-cost averaging for the long term has been able to take advantage of ups and downs in that market anyway.

39 posted on 10/27/2006 6:21:18 AM PDT by Alberta's Child (Can money pay for all the days I lived awake but half asleep?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies ]


To: Alberta's Child

"You're not soiling the party, either. Anyone who got screwed when the NASDAQ collapsed was clearly over-exposed to high-risk stocks that any investor with even a modicum of financial sense would have stayed away from."

I was on our church's finance committee during the Clintoonian years. I took a lot of abuse for refusing to put all of a retro fit fund, the church's savings and an endowment fund mainly into QQQ and then DIA, SPY and MDY at that time. The big pressure came at the first of 2000.

One of the pushers of this madness, lost over 50% on his Keough and IRA's. He wanted to retire in 2002. He is still working as an accountant and an CFO at hire. He thanks me every time we see each other for standing against his terrible advise and preventing the finance committee from buying into QQQQ. He blames the Arthur Andersen imaginary accounting for the bursts, and people like him who forgot the basics of business and invested in the dot.com insanity.


42 posted on 10/27/2006 7:40:04 AM PDT by Grampa Dave (There's a dwindling market for Marxist Homosexual Lunatic wet dreams posing as journalism)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies ]

To: Alberta's Child; Grampa Dave
caveat emptor. Too many McAuliffe sharks trying to turn a $100,000 stock investment into $18,000,000 make NASDAQ a risky place for conservative savers. Las Vegas offers better odds to gamblers.
48 posted on 10/27/2006 8:05:32 AM PDT by Milhous (Twixt truth and madness lies but a sliver of a stream.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson