You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
Forbes: GOOG could fall 50% in 2006
- Thread starter capmac
- Start date
Quote from capmac:
GOOG Forbes columnist says GOOG could fall 50% in 2006 (416.78 -3.37)
Not much explanation provided, but Forbest columnist Daniel Lyons says today in his column that GOOG will drop 50% plus by the end of 2006.
I can't tell you how entertaining it is for me to think about how many millions will be lost shorting this stock. You don't have to be wrong to lose lots o' cash shorting GOOG. Every time I read a new thread in which someone is posting saying "Now is the time to short GOOG", I wonder where he first got short and how far underwater he is.
Contrarians make money in this game, right? Or is it those who 'see money lying in a corner and go over and pick it up'? Short GOOG ain't money lying in a corner just yet. What I don't get is, why don't shorts just wait for the stock to break down?
PS - not saying the OP is advocating GOOG as a short, but the columnist seems to be.
Quote from capmac:
GOOG Forbes columnist says GOOG could fall 50% in 2006 (416.78 -3.37)
Not much explanation provided, but Forbest columnist Daniel Lyons says today in his column that GOOG will drop 50% plus by the end of 2006.
Umm, do a quick google search on Daniel Lyons. According to many of the blogs out there, it seems like he has a long history of dogging competitors to MSFT including Rhat and IBM to name a few. I haven't had a chance to read this article, but his past articles aren't exactly pulitzers. That being said, I have no opinion on Google, but always look at the source!
GOOG Google warned over voice-over-Internet-protocol patent - NY Post (420.15 )
The New York Post reports a little known patent-holding co has threatened "to bring Google (GOOG) to its knees," unless the co agrees to settle allegations of patent infringement. New York-based Rates Technology has slapped Google with a lawsuit claiming that Google Talk, the co's voice-over-Internet-protocol service, infringes on patents covering technology that facilitates cheap 'Net-based telephone service. Although the lawsuit does not specify damages, Jerry Weinberger, president of Rates Tech, said that if Google refuses to settle the lawsuit and RTI prevails, the co would seek $5 bln in damages based on royalties that will have accrued over the course of the trial, which could last for four years.
The New York Post reports a little known patent-holding co has threatened "to bring Google (GOOG) to its knees," unless the co agrees to settle allegations of patent infringement. New York-based Rates Technology has slapped Google with a lawsuit claiming that Google Talk, the co's voice-over-Internet-protocol service, infringes on patents covering technology that facilitates cheap 'Net-based telephone service. Although the lawsuit does not specify damages, Jerry Weinberger, president of Rates Tech, said that if Google refuses to settle the lawsuit and RTI prevails, the co would seek $5 bln in damages based on royalties that will have accrued over the course of the trial, which could last for four years.
$5 billion in royalties fee? Good luck.
Quote from capmac:
GOOG Google warned over voice-over-Internet-protocol patent - NY Post (420.15 )
The New York Post reports a little known patent-holding co has threatened "to bring Google (GOOG) to its knees," unless the co agrees to settle allegations of patent infringement. New York-based Rates Technology has slapped Google with a lawsuit claiming that Google Talk, the co's voice-over-Internet-protocol service, infringes on patents covering technology that facilitates cheap 'Net-based telephone service. Although the lawsuit does not specify damages, Jerry Weinberger, president of Rates Tech, said that if Google refuses to settle the lawsuit and RTI prevails, the co would seek $5 bln in damages based on royalties that will have accrued over the course of the trial, which could last for four years.
anything is possible but let's not forget - if such scenario exist for real (and I doubt it) the indices and Nasdaq especially looks vulnerable i.e. 5-10% correction. One goes with the other. Look at the daily QQQQ for my model that I actually use for the S&P.
The weekly is still strong and shows upside.
The weekly is still strong and shows upside.
Quote from capmac:
GOOG Forbes columnist says GOOG could fall 50% in 2006 (416.78 -3.37)
Not much explanation provided, but Forbest columnist Daniel Lyons says today in his column that GOOG will drop 50% plus by the end of 2006.
Attachments
Quote from capmac:
GOOG Forbes columnist says GOOG could fall 50% in 2006 (416.78 -3.37)
Not much explanation provided, but Forbest columnist Daniel Lyons says today in his column that GOOG will drop 50% plus by the end of 2006.
goog probably will drop 50% at some point. look at all of the great tech growth stocks. intc,dell,csco,yhoo,ebay,ect. they all had big drops once the growth slowed. its just a matter of timing.
Quote from traderNik:
I can't tell you how entertaining it is for me to think about how many millions will be lost shorting this stock. You don't have to be wrong to lose lots o' cash shorting GOOG. Every time I read a new thread in which someone is posting saying "Now is the time to short GOOG", I wonder where he first got short and how far underwater he is.
Contrarians make money in this game, right? Or is it those who 'see money lying in a corner and go over and pick it up'? Short GOOG ain't money lying in a corner just yet. What I don't get is, why don't shorts just wait for the stock to break down?
PS - not saying the OP is advocating GOOG as a short, but the columnist seems to be.
You are correct you don't have to be short long to lose lots of cash but the same is for longs who trade on a daily bases.
Google has at least a 5 dollar range on most days ..that is both long and short...I find goog best to trade via options..puts or calls..above existing highs on calls..I see goog 370...goog options make it possible to soften the possible error in the trade..
not all who speak about shorting or going long in a stock are deep in the water...
ET provides me? sometimes with a different perspective on my possible trade..
If shorts wait until the stock breaks down then one losses the money on the pullback...and it again assumes one will know where the bottom is
The stock market goes both long and short daily..I for the life of me do not understand so many traders always speaking of only going longs or long positions..You lose out on so many good trades that are predictable and visable...the trend is your friend..
happy new year to all..
w