[obrolan-bandar] Beberapa cuplikan ocehan si Darvas yg saya baca

[Soeratman Doerachman]

Through these and other experiences, however, certain conclusions began to emerge. As a baby repeatedly hearing the same words starts to learn them, so did I slowly start, through my trading experiences, to discern the outlines of some rules that I could apply? They were: I should not follow advisory services. They are not infallible, either in Canada or on Wall Street. I should be cautious with brokers' advice. They can be wrong. I should ignore Wall Street sayings, no matter how ancient and revered. I should not trade "over the counter"—only in listed stocks where there is always a buyer when I want to sell. I should not listen to rumors, no matter how well founded they may appear. The fundamental approach worked better for me than gambling. I should study it. I should rather hold on to one rising stock for a longer period than juggle with a dozen stocks for a short period at a time.     I thumbed through lists like: ­        Stocks with top quality rating ­        Stocks the experts like ­        Stocks selling below book value ­        Stocks with strong cash position ­        Stocks that have never cut their dividend     It seemed only logical to me that I should try to find through fundamental analysis: a) The strongest industry group; b) The strongest company within that industry group.   High Grade stocks whose dividend payments are considered relatively sure are rated: AAA—Safest AA—Safe A—Sound Investment Merit stocks that usually pay dividends: BBB—Best of group BB—Good B—Fair   Lesser Grade stocks, paying dividends but future not sure: CCC—Best of group CC—Fair dividend prospects C—Slight dividend prospects Lowest Grade stocks: DDD—No dividend prospects DD—Slight apparent value D—No apparent value I studied all these ratings very very carefully. It seemed so very simple. There was no longer any need for me to analyze balance sheets and income accounts. It was all spelled out for me here, I had only to compare: A is better than B, C is better than D.   From my reading I knew that stocks —like herds, indeed—form groups according to the industry they represent and that stocks belonging to the same industry have the tendency to move together in the market, either up or down. It seemed only logical to me that I should try to find through fundamental analysis: a) The strongest industry group; b) The strongest company within that industry group. Then I should buy the stock of that company and hold on to it, for such an ideal stock must rise.   As I looked at my table I began to feel a wave of excitement. My table, like a pointer on a scale, clearly pointed to one stock: JONES & LAUGHLIN. I could not imagine why no one had noticed it before. Everything about it was perfect. 􀂾 It belonged to a strong industry group. 􀂾 It had a strong B rating. 􀂾 It paid almost 6% dividend. 􀂾 Its price-earnings ratio was better than that of any other stock in the group.   __._,_.___ SPONSORED LINKS Business finance course Business to business finance Small business finance Business finance consultant Business finance magazine YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS  Visit your group "obrolan-bandar" on the web.    To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:  [EMAIL PROTECTED]    Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service. __,_._,___