Seeking Alpha

Larry Bellehumeur » Comments » GOOG

  • Google Chrome: Redefining the Operating System [View article]
    The stock went up 25% from July 8th, the day of this article, in less than 2 weeks. It is still up 15% from then....

    Kind of proves my point....the market doesn't care about Google in this area, until they break the Corporate Monopoly. Not saying that they can't do it, just that it won't matter until they do.

    Larry


    On Jul 08 10:58 AM CloroxCowboy wrote:

    > Gotta disagree. Mac and Linux are completely different than what
    > Google's proposing with Chrome. Apples are too expensive for marginal,
    > if any, computing advantage...it's all about buying an image. Linux
    > is not necessarily hard to configure, but it's not the push-button
    > solution that Goodle is describing either. And neither is really
    > a web-based OS like Chrome would be.
    >
    > A fast, streamlined, FREE os that gets users on the web quickly...I
    > think MSFT is in serious trouble.
    >
    > On Jul 08 10:01 AM Larry Bellehumeur wrote:
    Aug 02 01:26 am |Rating: 0 0 |Link to Comment
  • Google Chrome: Redefining the Operating System [View article]
    The Market won't care.....there has been a viable option in MAC and Linux for years, and MSFT is still king. Do you imagine a Fortune 500 company, which is where much of their money comes from, switching over? The average Home user might put $100 in MSFT's pocket, where as GE might put hundreds of millions per year....

    When Google cracks the Corporate market, then people will notice.
    Jul 08 10:01 am |Rating: +3 -1 |Link to Comment
  • Five Great Quality Companies: Are They Too Expensive? [View article]
    SEC -- I must have been a bit drunk.....lol

    My only excuse is that July 31st (when I wrote that) was my birthday, and I might have had one too many. I actually don't even remember writing anything!

    I have a Masters in Criminology, actually, although I will be sure not to show my Prof that statement!

    For the record, I must have been trying to say, "I used ain't as a way of emphasizing my point"....

    I think I am going to apply for Remedial English now.....
    Aug 19 23:38 pm |Rating: 0 0 |Link to Comment
  • Five Great Quality Companies: Are They Too Expensive? [View article]
    BS-D.....When one writes an article with an opinion (my work is more opinion than factual, as no one really knows where these stocks will go), you have to expect that you will have some objectors. Everyone is entitled to their opinion, and I welcome the idea of hearing what people think. We all read numbers and evaluations differently.

    One important part to remember is that most people on SA don't do this for money.....I've never seen a cent for anything. We do it to share ideas with like-minded people, and hopefully, cause some discussion.

    In terms of some of my word choice, I used "ain't" as a way as a form of emphasis (I have a Masters, I know it isn't a grammatically correct choice).

    In terms of this article, perhaps I should have expected that some people would not grasp the concept of it. My comments spoke about the attributes of Apple, and its dominant market share. Amazing how calling it expensive set off a great uproar.....the stock corrected around 35% at one point this year, so someone else must have thought it got out of control as well.

    I'm going to continue to post articles, and I welcome all comments...good or bad!

    Cheers and thanks for reading!
    Larry
    Jul 31 21:02 pm |Rating: 0 0 |Link to Comment
  • Five Great Quality Companies: Are They Too Expensive? [View article]
    Mental note -- If you want to get a lot of comments on your article, just bash Apple!

    BrianZach -- your point matches to what I am saying. Apple is a great business, just an expensive one.


    Jul 29 20:54 pm |Rating: 0 0 |Link to Comment
  • Five Great Quality Companies: Are They Too Expensive? [View article]
    Thanks for the grammatical correction, Tuskagee. As for my bias towards or against RIMM, I love the company. I've known many of the executives from the time that they used to make Cellular modules for Vending machines. I had one of the first 850 devices ever made, and have had a BlackBerry on my waist since 2000. If anything, I would be tilted in favour of them......Funny thing is that their evaluation probably looks better now than it ever did!

    Bearfund -- interesting point. I've never understood why a company like Apple wouldn't pay a dividend. Google is still in acquiring mode, so they get a pass for now....I do know in the future never to critique Apple though! Seems to draw out the claws from people....
    Jul 29 00:25 am |Rating: 0 0 |Link to Comment
  • Five Great Quality Companies: Are They Too Expensive? [View article]
    Tuskagee -- Good quote. There is no way of ever knowing the exact value of anything in this world, as the only value that one can place is what someone else is willing to pay for it......That is how you determine the price of a Picasso, a house or a stock. I like Buffett's expression of a Margin of Safety....in case one does make such an error.

    FYI -- Mercedes owned Chrysler and devested itself last year, in case you weren't making a joke.

    Larry
    Jul 28 19:40 pm |Rating: 0 0 |Link to Comment
  • Five Great Quality Companies: Are They Too Expensive? [View article]
    Definitely a lot of opinions when it comes to stocks, that is for sure...Hey, what makes this page great is that everyone can have an opinion!

    A few points:
    - The overall point of this article was to see what others thought about these companies evaluations. I thought that I made it clear that I liked the long-term prospects of all of these companies....apparentl... I didn't.
    - The Projected earnings that I got for the stocks were from a combination of 3 recognized sources. If I did miss much of the earnings as people have pointed out, then it appears that many of the large investments houses / Financial pages do as well. One can only evaluate based on the fact that are in front of them.
    - Everyone has their opinion, but you can't tell me that people lined up all night for Apple because "Apple products are easy to use and go wrong less often than their competitors." They hype their products better than anyone. My point is that they are still in a market where consumers can be fickle. If Apple's Sustainable advantage was so good, then why did they go in the tank for over a decade?
    - I know RIMM's model well. For full disclosure, I have a number of awards from them on my shelf, as I help to launch their product as a consultant, and as an Associate Director in the Sales for a carrier. They are a great company....you missed my point. It is their evaluations that are bad.

    Love the comments, everyone! It's what makes this page fun!

    Jul 28 14:30 pm |Rating: 0 0 |Link to Comment
More on GOOG by Larry Bellehumeur
Larry Bellehumeur's
Comments Stats
108 comments
Rating: 49 (59 - 10 )