Gil Morales

Gil Morales
Send Message
View as an RSS Feed
  • CyberArk Software: A Bubble Ready To Burst?  [View article]
    The unfortunate thing about this type of "analysis" is that such I-Am-Smarter-Than-The-... foreknowledge would have kept one from capitalizing on the stock's rapid rise over the past couple of weeks. Price/volume rules, everything else is just conversation, and there is nothing new offered here other than the obvious, which is that after such a meteoric rise the stock is vulnerable to a sharp pullback and so anyone who got onboard on the first pocket pivot buy point under $40 can now take a very comfortable and festive profit solely on a technical basis. The writer would be more impressive if he had told readers to buy CYBR before the move rather than coming in here at this point and stating the obvious.
    Feb 20, 2015. 07:34 PM | 10 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • GM (Giant) The TSLA (Jack) Killer? The Market-Makers Don't Think So... Yet  [View article]
    Who indeed! Whoever they are, it looks like these market makers disappeared this morning. Interestingly when the stock was $44 nearly two years ago everyone wanted to short the stock based on "fundamental" arguments, now everyone thinks the stock is a "long-term" buy based on a different set of "fundamental" arguments that seem to hold little water. This is actually quite typical for a stock when it tops and is in the second phase of its initial price "life-cycle." My advice to those who wanted to buy the stock now, after its had a big price run and is now in decline: learn to read a simple price/volume chart.
    Jan 14, 2015. 09:27 AM | 1 Like Like |Link to Comment
  • Netflix May Be In For Some More Pain Shortly  [View article]
    Bottom line: If you are buying NFLX while it is in a downtrend, you are merely doing in reverse what foolish shorts did while the stock was in an uptrend. If one wishes to play the part of a graduate of the University of I-Am-Smarter-Than-The-... and buy into a downtrend or short into an uptrend, I wish them good luck with that!
    Nov 26, 2014. 08:20 AM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Netflix May Be In For Some More Pain Shortly  [View article]
    Averaging down is a foolish concept when a leading stock begins to break down. Understanding when a stock is in an uptrend and when it's in a downtrend is far more relevant that the mindless "excuse" of averaging down into a decline that is objectively proving the bull case wrong in real-time.
    Nov 22, 2014. 12:40 PM | 1 Like Like |Link to Comment
  • Interview With Dr. Christian Kacher (Part 1)  [View article]
    First of all, these were private funds, and we don't post the results of our current fund either since that is against SEC protocol, despite the fact that it would look very nice if we did so. I also consider the period of 2006-2009 to be irrelevant, outside of being a valuable learning experience because I tried to run a fund using an aggressive style that had a lot of volatility imbedded in the strategy. I did not account for having to deal with the emotions of investors who refused to acknowledge the risk inherent in a style that produces big upside and downside as this created a huge psychological issue for me. Secondly, I was involved with associates who did not share the same O'Neil mentality as I, and this was also an impediment. Dr. Kacher experienced similar difficulties in the fund he was running in Europe at the time. I feel that writing about the entire experience in a book discloses it quite plainly, but I do not consider that experience relevant to how I normally trade when not having to deal with the emotions and psychological trepidations of investors and associates. As well, it is not relevant to the way we manage money today for investors as we use an entirely different strategy that we've devised to overcome the inherent psychological problems in dealing with a private fund.

    Jesse Livermore went broke twice and didn't retire his capital, so I disagree with your premise in this regard as well.
    Jul 26, 2011. 10:05 AM | 1 Like Like |Link to Comment
  • Interview With Dr. Christian Kacher (Part 1)  [View article]
    No, I went after this guy because he went on the internet and made what I see as false statements, saying I lost money because I was "arrogant and reckless" and that "nobody ever lost 50% using CAN SLIM," and that I don't "use CAN SLIM." As well, there is an issue of misappropriation of professional identity. There is no need to "suppress" such numbers since we disclose our performance from 1998-2005 on our website, www.virtueofselfishinv.../, which clearly shows that such drawdowns of 50% or more have occurred previously throughout periods where I've made big money. As well, we discuss the errors of 2009 in the book, "Trade Like an O'Neil Disciple," so the idea of trying to "suppress" information is nonsense. The issue here is the use of a mere slice of information to portray me in a light that a) attempts to interfere with my business and b) slants the information to portray me as badly as possible for the purpose of seeking revenge. When someone attempts this I will defend myself, end of story. In the case the court deemed me to be a "public person" hence the standard of truth applied was lower. Hedge funds are private affairs, and you won't ever see any other hedge fund client acting in such a manner as this buffoon when they lose money in what is ostensibly a very high-risk vehicle and is advertised as such. Hello, hello, did the guy bother to read the fund documents which stated quite clearly that the fund carried with it the risk of "substantial losses."
    Jul 25, 2011. 10:04 AM | 1 Like Like |Link to Comment
  • Interview With Dr. Christian Kacher (Part 1)  [View article]
    There is a good lesson here, as this shows what happens when you drag a hedge fund through a trailer park - you get low-brow investors who really can't handle the risk. Probably a symptom of the housing bubble which allowed some individuals to qualify as accredited investors on the basis of an inflated home value and get into hedge funds where their own greed got in the way of assessing the risk. After all, the first year I ran money for Bill O'Neil I dropped about 77% from peak to trough in 1998 but ended the year up 82%. This vengeance website won't post what we're doing now as we kick A handily in 2011, or that I was up about 100% in May 2010 alone...but that is not its purpose. Readers of this blog should at least understand that.
    Jul 22, 2011. 08:41 AM | 2 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Interview With Dr. Christian Kacher (Part 1)  [View article]
    If you go to, my 8-year audited track record from 1997-2005 is available for viewing. During that period I made about 11,000% with a few drawdowns of 20-30%, sometimes 50% or more. This is typical of my style. Because a disgruntled investor who first demanded that we reimburse him for his losses in the fund and, when we refused, decided to make an issue of the fund's losses by misappropriating my professional identity with this website, it doesn't mean this isn't normal for my style. If you want to find out what I'm doing these days, go to If someone wants to be a crank and go on a campaign of revenge, there's not much I can say about it other than that it takes a slice of time where I had a drawdown, not unlike others in my career, and tries to make an "issue" out of it for the purpose of discrediting me. Ce la goes on and I make up my losses, end of story.
    Jul 22, 2011. 08:01 AM | 2 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Interview With Dr. Christian Kacher (Part 1)  [View article]
    I consider such an examination to be necessary for survival as a trader. This is a concept that O'Neil beat into our heads. Even after I was up big in the O'Neil firm account at the end of 1999, O'Neil came into my office and gave me my bonus check and then proceeded to hammer me on my mistakes, telling me that if I had done everything correctly I could have been up 1,000%, twice what I was in the account I ran for him. When I told him that I WAS up 1,000% in my personal account, he simply said that I probably could have been up 2,000%. That is an O'Neil ethic. It is burned into our brains.
    Psychologically, I also think it is dangerous to let yourself be billed a "guru." That can get you into a frame of mind where you no longer allow yourself to be wrong, and instead have a stake in always looking as if you are right. After all, you are a "guru," right? I fell into that trap, I have to admit, and would not allow myself to be wrong, hence I let some losses run too long as I remained rigid in my market view. Some might interpret that as "arrogance," I prefer to interpret it as stupidity. My errors in 2009 were not due to a lack of technique, they were entirely psychological errors and they came at the worst possible time: March/April 2009. It's all in the book - a perfect storm, so to speak. So far I am pleased that my rehabilitation has been coming along nicely, based on the objective results - so far. For my own style of trading however, in the future, I only plan on managing my own account(s).
    I am happy to discuss any of these aspects and issues of trading, and anyone on this blog is invited to call me at my office, 310-237-5832 or email me at The truth is not my enemy, and as traders I don't think any of us can afford for it to ever be.
    Sep 5, 2010. 01:42 PM | 4 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Interview With Dr. Christian Kacher (Part 3)  [View article]
    Bill began Investor's Business Daily to bring institutional-quality research data to the little guy. As a business venture, it has cost him a lot of money. He originally started as an institutional advisor under William O'Neil + Co., Inc. and that business still exists today, although it is much smaller and just one of several O'Neil companies under the Data Analysis, Inc. parent-company umbrella. The profits made there, however, were what allowed him to throw money at Investors Business Daily, which is ostensibly for the little guy. I've worked with Bill, and I know him fairly well. He has made it his life's work to help the little guy. It is not fair to judge him in such a manner based on partial and skewed evidence.
    Sep 5, 2010. 10:33 AM | 2 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Interview With Dr. Christian Kacher (Part 1)  [View article]
    Dr. Kacher received a Ph.D. in Nuclear Chemistry, which involves a lot of work in Physics, hence is roughly equivalent to Nuclear Physics - the line between the two is blurred. Now, we can only wish you had bothered to get your "verifiable facts" straight. What is this blog anyway? An outlet for geek/trader/investors misfits and losers?
    Sep 2, 2010. 11:36 PM | 4 Likes Like |Link to Comment