Skip to main content
Message Font: Serif | Sans-Serif
 
No. of Recommendations: 0
Al Levit wrote in Friday's CKPort:

"One of the rules we follow in Fooldom is to concentrate on the winners in a given portfolio. With the winners will lie an increasing portion of our savings. You can expect us to write considerably more about Microsoft, Gap, Pfizer, and Intel than to spend too much time on American Express and T. Rowe Price today."

Apparently the philosophy of learning from your mistakes is not considered Foolish. How sad!

Considering we're all just as likely to pick an AXP loser as a GAP winner (or, in my case, an INVX instead of an AOL), an occasional discussion of why a CK (or FoolPort) stock turned down would be far more helpful and educational than yet another episode of back-patting.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
Butterfool,

I appreciate the request, and we will be certain to honor it here in Fooldom. We'll be more than happy to review our mistakes and can, of course, learn much from our losers.

I do have to disagree with your claims of "backpatting" because I believe Al's point is an excellent one. If investors were trained to focus on their winners, in order to determine whether they expected them to keep winning, this would be a great contribution to investment education. Rather than paring away winners to add to losers that "just have to come back", Fools would come to realize that in the public markets (as in much of life), the best often keeping getting better.

I respect your wish to see coverage of a few dogs and why they barked. But I hope you can see through to the excellent point that Al was making. It isn't backpatting. After all, we haven't sold any Microsoft shares yet -- and we're hoping to hold on for at least ten years. We believe it is critical to make a priority out of thoroughly understanding your winners. There lies your greater amount of savings. There lies the businesses you own that likely have been succeeding. There lies, in many ways, the future of your account. Given this, following closely and understanding more about your winners seems the more consequential of the two tasks. Again, though, we will cover our losers and hope you don't think the Cash-King Portfolio has been guilty of backpatting.

Tom
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
Apparently the philosophy of learning from your mistakes is not considered Foolish. How sad!

While I agree that one should also look at losing stocks to see why they aren't doing well, isn't it a bit early to declare the underachievers "mistakes?" They've only been in the portfolio for a few months, after all.

have fun,
--Anthony
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
We started our C-K portfolio late. Just took us longer to figure it out, dumb luck.

AXP, KO & TROW are my best performers.

So, taking about the FOOL C-K port losers!

Fishlip:)
Print the post Back To Top