Replies to post #1418 on A.I.M. Users Bulletin Board (AIMUSERS)

[JSLyons]

Settle down, Conrad. You're clearly still upset that I once called you a mathematician -- not an engineer -- on the TMF thread.

I have no intention of getting into a fight with you, but do resent your use of words like "sucker" and "idiotic." They denigrate the thread and reflect poorly on you. In your shoes, I should appolgize -- not to me but to the other readers.

Frankly, I am extremely pleased with my results in the market over more than two decades. Even without Vortex. I do not need to be lectured by the likes of you.

I hereby put you on ignore (if there is such a function here at I-Hub) If not, I'll go back to SI. Have a good life.

Jonathan

[ergo sum]

Conrad,

Sorry to start by disagreeing but:

At some point in time the fundamentals of ENRON were such that the company was beyond salvation. According to the Risk Pyramid it would have been a perfect time to invest in ENRON at the very moment it became known that it could not be saved: The high Risk would certainly guarantee high profits...according to the Risk Prophets.

There are at least two offers to buy this company rught now. People who are buying at maybe 10 cents on the dollar. Very smart people if you ask me.

No investment is with out risk. Goverment bonds probably have the least risk, but if the currency gets devalued you will lose money. Stocks by there nature are more risky.

Ergo Sum

[Qarel]

Conrad,

all that heat spent on a semantic misunderstanding. 'Risk' in the context of investing doesn't mean the same as risk at the gambling table or in the snake pit. Its meaning is closer to volatility. High risk investments are fluctuating so much that short term profits are hard to get. Over the long term the fluctuations cancel out, and then the high risk investments prove to be the high return investments. That's all.

Karel

[OldAIMGuy]

Hi Conrad, Are you saying that a biotech start-up and a government bond fund have both the same risk and reward potential?

:-)
Tom