Hi David - welcome to Wikinvest! I hope you'll find the site a useful resource, and I'm thrilled to see you've already started contributing to some of the bulls and bears articles on the site.
A quick note - I had to undo some of your edits, unfortunately, because they pretty much exclusively cited a (your?) proprietary trading model. Because it's hard for anyone else to independently verify the validity of this trading model, than in itself is not sufficient to be included in a bulls page. Perhaps you'd consider explaining what about the company makes you bullish / bearish (and therefore why the trading model is showing the results that it is)? For example, is the price low relative to peers (or vice-versa)? Is there some new opportunity on the horizon? The information you post should be able to be validated by others on the site.
We're also planning to relaunch our bulls & bears feature in a week or so - when that happens, I would very much like to hear your thoughts on the new functionality and how you like it. Please feel free to contact me if you have any questions or there's anything I can do to help (link below).
Parkerconrad 11:34, December 18, 2007 (PST)
Thanks for the updates you've made on Apple! I think they do make the intro clearer and more informative.
I noticed that you mentioned iPhone's worldwide launch. I'm looking to add to address this in the article. How do you think the iPhone will fare in the international market (especially in HK/Japan)?
You can reach me at the link below
Bpan 15:48, June 11, 2008 (PDT)
Good to see you back on the site! I checked out your edits to Apple, thanks for the fine-tuning of the language.
Just wanted to reach out and say hello - be in touch if you've got any Wikinvest-related thoughts or comments.
Adamfarren 15:52, December 4, 2008 (PST)
Saw your Bears reason on Apple - thanks! I think it's great, and exactly what I think Bulls/Bears should be.
A question though - don't you think that would be more appropriate as a Bulls reason? It seems you are arguing that this company will continue to have success. If so, I'd suggest copy and pasting the text into the Bulls page instead...and then just let me know you've done that and I can delete the reason on the Bears page.
Adamfarren 16:02, December 5, 2008 (PST)
David - It looks like you've removed yourself from the call on Tuesday. Can you please send me your feedback from slides 5 and 6 anyhow? Email is fine.
Jwmoore 19:40, December 10, 2008 (PST)
Hey David -
I noticed that you made a few great edits to the apple article, among others. I just wanted to say thanks. I hope you are doing well.
Happy Holidays, Jwmoore 15:56, December 23, 2008 (PST)
Thanks for getting the Circuit City Stores (CC) liquidation news into the article so quickly!
Adamfarren 13:33, January 16, 2009 (PST)
Hi David -
Just wanted to let you know that I removed the below content from the MSFT page. I think its definitely appropriate for a Bears reason on MSFT, just not for the neutral page. I've pasted it below so you can just click edit and then copy/paste the content into a Bears reason.
Hope all is well, and glad to see your contributions again!
Adamfarren 17:46, May 28, 2009 (PDT)
In a recurring example of an apparent corporate committment to be/become #1 or a major #2 competitor in each of the markets it enters, Microsoft has repeatedly been distracted by a willingness to expend huge amounts of cash to purchase either Yahoo in its entirety, or to effect a more modest and slimmed down purchase of the Yahoo search property. The latest word of that eagerness appears in The New York Times of May 28, 2009 article headlining, "Yahoo Still Open to Microsoft Deal at Right Price." One of Wikinvest's contributors, David Turetsky ("richSOB"), posted this comment on The New York Times web site summarizing the issue:
"I thought Steve Ballmer had it right when he reflected that Microsoft had “moved on” from doing a deal with Yahoo
And Carol Bartz, Yahoo’s new CEO, certainly has it right when she teases about the possibility of a sale in those new units of U.S. currency, “boatloads” and “big boatloads”
I can understand why Yahoo would strategically welcome such a transfusion of cash in a slowing economy whose worse days may still lie ahead and whose best days of technological leadership are behind it. For Microsoft, a deal has the allure of a quick fix for its market share in search, but over time that hefty purchase price will make less and less sense as Microsoft must continue to invest in digesting the purchase, updating the technology, all the while suffering the inevitable erosion of the combined customer base
That critical mass may well turn out to be an expensive illusion and a huge strategic distraction
Why not instead consider the purchase of The New York Times?"
Separately, in the same edition of The New York Times, "Bloodied by Google, Microsoft Tries Again on Search," Mr. Ballmer is cited as "no longer interested in buying Yahoo but still hopes the two companies will find a way to team up to take on Google in search, and talks on a partnership are continuing." The article describes a newly enhanced search engine, newly labeled "Bing," soon available at www.bing.com, which attempts to go beyond the capabilities of current search engines and which would seem to represent a more promising investment of resources
It should also be noted that the Times article expressing a continuing interest in a sale by Yahoo may represent Yahoo's perspective and not be indicative of any current purchase interest by Microsoft