I meant companies…

Thanks for the indepth analysis… I wait anxiously for your next enlightening post.

It’s a buying opportunity before the train leaves the station.

Don’t forget, “click fraud” can evaporate 30% off those revenue numbers. A

miss is a miss is a miss. How can analysts use a 26% tax bracket on a

company earning $1.92 billion. CFO should be fired. Everyone got it wrong.

Chart was damaged too. IMO.

Another day or 2 and the margin clerks have more power than the anal-ists.

I'm with the original poster...I've thought for awhile that GOOG smelled like 1999-2000 all over again.  P/E in the stratosphere, etc.  Sure, there are earnings, but any miss with those valuations, and we see the kind of reaction we've seen yesterday and today.

and of course, the analysts are hard at it defending their price targets...

Are you guys kidding me?  I don't own google, but it was down to 375 in after hours, and if I had the cahonas I would of picked some up in my IRA...I knew there would be folks buying it back...it opened at 389 today and is sitting around 395.  But then I would have dumped it.

Volitility can be a good thing, if you are on the right side of it

For an IRA????? At 130 billion I dont see it as a steady blue chip or long term investment.

Noggin sometimes I write with a little bit of shazam. Hope you dont mind.

Skee what is IMO? Amazing that the company had the wrong tax bracket. WOW, that really makes you question a potential earning correction over the next year or two. Just like the good old times in 2000.

In My Opinion…but you really should focus on your studying shouldn’t you?

All I can say is "BOOOYAHHH, Jim"

Yeah, he’d better put a post-it on his forehead tonight, for sure.

[quote=7GOD63]

One has to love Wall Street who has buy, buy, buy on this company. Sounds a lot like 2000 to me.... AMAZING.

[/quote]

http://finance.yahoo.com/q/ud?s=GOOG

Here's the info on the ratings on Google. I'm not sure it's fair to say "Wall Street" has a "buy, buy, buy" on it. Check it for yourself.

Listen, I’ll be the first to admit I goofed last year passing up on GOOG.

Instead I held YHOO. But I’m over it. I still won’t take a chance with that

click fraud overhang.



In fair disclosure, I do own a mutual fund with GOOG as the biggest

position.

Goldman Sachs analyst Anthony Noto told clients to buy the stock at $380 to ride the run-up to $500, his 12-month price target. He said that he's still predicting 20% to 25% earnings growth from 2007 to 2010.

The quarter was "not as bad as you think," according to a Jefferies & Co. report. "Buy on the pullback," the analyst suggested.

Prudential's Mark Rowen also suggested using the weakness as an opportunity to buy the stock, and went as far as raising his price target to $500 from $400.

Bear Stearns analyst Robert Peck kept his rating at outperform and his price target at $550. He called the sell-off in the stock an "overreaction," and recommended buying on the pullback.

If you liked LU @ $74, you're going to LOVE it @ $35!!!

Sound familiar to some of us????     

[quote=exEJIR]

If you liked LU @ $74, you're going to LOVE it @ $35!!!

Sound familiar to some of us????     

[/quote]

Bought it between 35-40, took losses between 18-20 and got almost everyone out.  It was a series of many painful conversations, but turned out to be a great move to take our lumps and move on.  That's when I really started to believe in technical analysis.

[quote=joedabrkr][quote=exEJIR]

If you liked LU @ $74, you're going to LOVE it @ $35!!!

Sound familiar to some of us????     

[/quote]

Bought it between 35-40, took losses between 18-20 and got almost everyone out.  It was a series of many painful conversations, but turned out to be a great move to take our lumps and move on.  That's when I really started to believe in technical analysis.

[/quote]

See how people take away different lessons? I didn't get caught up in LU because the fundamentals were lacking. Now, if I could ever find a TA guy who could answer a question in a straight forward manner AND used ink instead of pencil to make those all important lines on the chart , who knows, I could be converted.  <?:namespace prefix = o ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" />

[quote=mikebutler222][quote=joedabrkr][quote=exEJIR]

If you liked LU @ $74, you're going to LOVE it @ $35!!!

Sound familiar to some of us????     

[/quote]

Bought it between 35-40, took losses between 18-20 and got almost everyone out.  It was a series of many painful conversations, but turned out to be a great move to take our lumps and move on.  That's when I really started to believe in technical analysis.

[/quote]

See how people take away different lessons? I didn't get caught up in LU because the fundamentals were lacking. Now, if I could ever find a TA guy who could answer a question in a straight forward manner AND used ink instead of pencil to make those all important lines on the chart , who knows, I could be converted.  <?:namespace prefix = o ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" />

[/quote]

I understand what you mean mike.  I used to feel the same way.  It's as much an art as a science.  You must adapt as the chart changes.....that's why we still use pencils. ;-)

[quote=7GOD63]

For an IRA????? At 130 billion I dont see it as a steady blue chip or long term investment.

Noggin sometimes I write with a little bit of shazam. Hope you dont mind.

Skee what is IMO? Amazing that the company had the wrong tax bracket. WOW, that really makes you question a potential earning correction over the next year or two. Just like the good old times in 2000.

[/quote]

Hey dipsh*t,

If you are going to buy and sell stocks over short periods of time (aka under 13 months) it is BETTER to do it in an IRA to avoid SHORT TERM CAPITAL GAINS.  Even better in a Roth if your income is within range.

Newbies.