From: anonymous-remailer@shell.portal.com
Date: Fri, 1 Dec 1995 12:35:26 +0800
To: cypherpunks@toad.com
Subject: Re: Netscape gives in to key escrow
Message-ID: <199512010335.TAA10408@jobe.shell.portal.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain


On Thu, 30 Nov 1995, Jay Holovacs wrote:

> On Thu, 30 Nov 1995, Timothy C. May wrote:
> 
> > Can Netscape continue to prosper? This latest issue won't kill it,
> 
> I suspect this will unfortunately help. Stockholders are interested in 
> profits, not principles. 

Uhhm, I think that that depends on what "class" of stockholder you're
speaking of.  The short term "trader" whose idea of a long-term investment
is the one that gives a decent return by lunchtime, or the one who wants
to buy a good company, make a solid investment, and put their stock away
for five years, knowing that their capital is being put to good use. 

They really are different players with different approaches.

Netscape stock as an example has lots of momentum ... it's in a feeding 
frenzy.  And I'm pretty sure that someone with "very" deep pockets -- 
possibly even someone who's got their own printing press -- is busily
buying everything in sight, and crossing trades on every up-tick.

(Disclaimer: Just my opinion, not speaking officically in any capacity.)

I'm not sure who might be behind any of this, though.  I haven't the
desktop power, nor the data or tool-set to chart and flow-analyze the
trading record, and see what the play is.)

I wouldn't really be surprised though if it was offshore interests who
want to "cash-in" on high-tech.  Standard "Von Clausewitz" reader-types. 
People who subscribe to "Von Clausewitz's" principles on "other means". 

I base this assessment purely on price-movement, and on the "known" 
fundamentals.  To this writer, it's pretty transparent.  

In the last six-weeks, Netscape has gone from the 60's to flirting with
150. That's one heck of a trend-line that some pseudo-technical
floor-trader types will jump on. 

Part of that is "market-forces", and part of that is definitely
"market-makers". 

The only way to counteract that is probably some Elliott Wave Theory
shakeout, or something similar.  It's the only way to stop 'em from
blowing up the balloon.  Or you need one killer scandal. 

Cheap advice, btw ... it's free ... and no-one even had to buy me a Gin &
Tonic, or some fancy canapes to hear it. 



Alice de 'nonymous ...

                                  ...just another one of those...


P.S.  This post is in the public domain.
                  C.  S.  U.  M.  O.  C.  L.  U.  N.  E.