You’d Be Stupid to Buy These Stocks

• Report this Comment On September 30, 2009, at 4:24 PM, DogDayAftern00n wrote:

  This article is completely useless. DNDN is up over 1,000% since it bottomed earlier this year, but the stock has solid fundamentals and consequently is a screaming buy.

  BCRX is also another stock with solid fundamentals. Just because it's up quite a bit from the low lows earlier this year doesn't mean that it isn't a good company and doesn't have a bright future ahead of it.

  Again, useless article. But then again, they don't call them "FOOLS" for nothing.

• Report this Comment On September 30, 2009, at 5:32 PM, MadStabber wrote:

  Uhhh hello... I picked the very bottom on 2/20 in my Foolish Blog and pick a "correction" before the Oct holiday. How did you Foolishly miss CHWG as the next 50 bagger? Their 3 liter bottling plant is scheduled to open in November. I do appreciate your respect for MVIS, the next company to project pictures on the MOON!

  Madfoolowner of MVIS and CHWG

• Report this Comment On September 30, 2009, at 11:49 PM, UraLoser123 wrote:

  YOU WOULD BE REALLY STUPIS TO TAKE ADVICE FROM THIS TRULY PATHETIC SITE. I LOVE IT WHEN THEY TELL YOU WHAT STOCKS TO BUY. THEY SIT BACK WHILE THE IDIOTS WHO LISTEN TO THEIR INSANE RECOMMENDATIONS BUY THESE WORTHLESS STOCKS, AND SELL AFTER REALITY SETS IN. TRULY, THESE IDIOTS ALONG WITH CRAMER WHO PULL THIS CRAP SHOULD BE INVESTIGATED. HOW IS THIS CRAP NOT ILLEGAL?

• Report this Comment On October 01, 2009, at 12:40 AM, stockmajor wrote:

  Adam, I liked your article, and I LOVE the Motley Fool. What a blessing and a resource this site provides!

  So, yes, I'm a Fool and loving it! And I'm laughing all the way to the bank. Oh, by the way, Cramer has helped me to earn some Mad Money along the way, also. So, Fool On!

• Report this Comment On October 01, 2009, at 10:30 AM, jthinker wrote:

  Definitely fools, who call themselves experts, should be not trusted with their opinions. It looks like they are sucking their "expertise" out of thing air and that "expertise" has nothing to do with real life.

  It is a no brainer to talk or write about past events with smart looking face, but they dare to predict future and give advice to people; just don't listen to them, let them be where fools are supposed to be - in a "fool house".

  The simple question is, What do they "Motley FOOLS" really know about real businesses they dare to talk about?

  The answer is obvious - nothing.

• Report this Comment On October 01, 2009, at 4:42 PM, S79T285 wrote:

  Mr. Wiederman:

  It is a fairly common trick, in among the unethical of financial journalists, to look predictive by increasing volatility at cusps. You exploit fear and greed to enhance your stature as predictors of stock prices.

  When Novavax was under a buck, you called it a deathbed stock. When it was over 5, you said it was "ready to soar." Neither of these statements focused on the truth, which is that medical advances for the benefit of all mankind are fragile, and not rationally understood by the financial markets. Your comments make the misunderstanding all the worse.

  When Novavax was, to use a medical term, in extremis, you stomped on it with the steel toed boot of a stormtrooper. Had you suceeded in precipitating bankruptcy, you would have benefited some shortsellers. But you do not understand the future, Mr. Weiderman. For every nickel they make, a child dies, not now, but in the future. The future counts very much, Mr. Weiderman. You were once a child. It is not inconceivable that some day, you could hold a child in your hands, dying but for a vaccine that could have been made by Novavax, or another startup.

  You seem to take pride in adherence to the ethics portrayed by Michael Douglas. I am sure that your market metrics indicate that you are succeeding well in increasing revenues of the Motley Fool. But there is a hidden cost, Mr. Wiederman. A lot of people now hate you. I despise you. If anyone ever refers to an opinion from your website, I will tell them this story. I will illuminate the entirely legal/yet unethical manipulations you engage in.

  I hope you fall hard.

• Report this Comment On October 02, 2009, at 12:04 AM, mirro7 wrote:

  There is an old saying: “a rolling stone gathers no mass.”

  So is the “trader” of the modern age… like a rolling stone that gather no [meaning full] portfolio mass in the long term. Let’s face it. A trader is not an investor and your advice is directed towards such traders. I hope it is, because if you are preaching your insanely dumb sermon to the investor choir you are foolishly naïve and should be committed to “investment education” for the next six months.

  I have always believed in investing in companies that ride the wave of change or bring about the paradigm shift with an eye on the long term growth prospects.

  I’m one of those old timers that invested in Intel during its early days as a company… in the early 80’s. I recall buying some shares for a total cost of $1,000 dollars. That was lot of money in those days and commission paid was a disgrace. Stock brokers were king of the hill and roamed the streets like God’s gift to humanity.

  I had to liquidate all my position in Intel during the Dot Com bust of 2000… around May of that year. I think it was just before the last stock split the company had. However, it was not all that bad, because I managed to sell pretty close to the all time high and I remember bragging about my good fortune and fortitude to have stayed the course to make over 14,000% profit… for a net gain of over $140,000 dollars. That’s right… over $140,000 in profit including dividends and the stock splits.

  In the last 30 odd years that I have been investing, I had my share of good fortune and misfortune. However, what’s important is the fact that I managed to secure my financial future and live today to talk about my strategy of investing in companies that ride the wave of change or bring about a paradigm shift.

  Some of these companies have grown to be huge enterprises and have made their early investors, like me, over 10,000% or over since their inception. Some day, I will tell you about my other [early] investment in companies like Dell, Qualcomm, Microsoft, Cisco, Healthsouth [after the 2003 perfect storm] and most recently Microvision. And while Dell has had disappointing returns since the turn of the century, its business is still strong and investors have not even come close to losing everything.

  Currently, I’m out of all the stocks except Microvision [Nasdaq: MVIS]. The past performers in my portfolio have served well. However, these companies like Intel, Dell, Qualcomm, Microsoft and Healthsouth are past their hyper growth phase and are now too big and are just slow earnings growth vehicles. No disrespect to these fine companies… it’s just that they don’t fit the “hyper growth” company model any more.

  My only stock holding now, besides an options income portfolio, is Microvision. If you would like to find out why I consider Microvision to be the next 50,000% profit producer, then click on the link to the following blog post and make sure to read all the related articles.

  Access to this blog is free and author’s profile will tell you why he is taking this time and making an effort to reach out and share information that already exists in the Internet sphere…

  http://mirro7.blogspot.com/2009_10_01_archive.html

  http://mirro7.blogspot.com/2009/09/microvision-from-here-to-...

  http://mirro7.blogspot.com/2009/09/yes-virginia-its-intel-in...

  Anant

• Report this Comment On October 02, 2009, at 8:25 AM, vefrancine wrote:

  I'm a retired Virologist and think NVAX has a very good model that will revolutionise vaccine production. Hang in there and don't listen to these fools.

• Report this Comment On October 04, 2009, at 10:40 AM, jthinker wrote:

  Just a question, Is there any legal way to shut down those "Motley FOOLS"? How much longer those self-proclaimed experts will mess with peoples' minds and cultivate the culture of short-sited followers?

  IT NEEDS TO BE STOPPED ONCE AND FOREVER. How many fools does this country need?

  It is enough already.

• Report this Comment On October 21, 2009, at 4:41 PM, liferlm wrote:

  If you wisemen would read beyond the headline you might come to a different conclusion regarding these MF's. (They are not actually claiming MVIS, NVAX, etc. ARE overvalued.) Now, don't you feel foolish?

Add your comment.