|
Post by adamthompson32 on Oct 2, 2012 16:00:12 GMT -8
I was contacted today by a guy at Fortune who is writing an article about long time AAPL investors who have most of their net worth invested in AAPL and have for years.
I can't participate for professional reasons (although I would love to!) but I told him I could probably send him a list of people. He said the more, the better. Let me know if you're interested and I'll try to make it happen. Personally, I prefer not to be the one gathering everyone's personal contact info for this (or anything else) so maybe iPad or someone else who wants to participate will volunteer? I can then send that person this guy's contact info.
|
|
Mav
Member
[img style="max-width:100%;" alt=" " src="http://www.forumup.it/images/smiles/simo.gif"]
Posts: 10,784
|
Post by Mav on Oct 2, 2012 16:08:44 GMT -8
Feels like a "setup". Particularly if the guy's name is Lashinsky, even if it's Elmer-DeWitt. Look, Fortune does have good journalists and Lashinsky and PED are among them, let's just get that out there.
But it wouldn't be a profile. It's be supposed profile, followed by a little editorial sneer (iSheep, iPortfolio, iDon'tDiversify?) and some WS types that'll say, if being "nice", that overconcentration in one stock is a fringe idea.
I can write this article before they do. Call me skeptical.
|
|
|
Post by adamthompson32 on Oct 2, 2012 16:16:52 GMT -8
Here's what the guy emailed me about the story when I asked a couple follow-up questions in response to his initial email.
"I'm looking for investors who have most of their money in Apple and who have had the position for years -- at least since 2007 but preferably longer. The goal, basically, is to tell the story of a handful of Apple investors whose conviction was so high that they ignored the early AAPL skeptics, bucked all the traditional diversification advice doled out by investment writers like myself, and in doing so made themselves wildly rich during an era when the stock market probably destroyed more wealth than it created."
|
|
Mav
Member
[img style="max-width:100%;" alt=" " src="http://www.forumup.it/images/smiles/simo.gif"]
Posts: 10,784
|
Post by Mav on Oct 2, 2012 16:19:30 GMT -8
Well I don't really qualify there, being one of the "small people".
Wait, how did the Fortune guy get in contact with you? I thought you were more anonymous than _I_ was...
|
|
|
Post by phoebear611 on Oct 2, 2012 16:38:00 GMT -8
I would highly suggest that if anyone wants to participate in this - I would highly suggest that you ask for final review of any quote you make. These reporters tend to misquote and the story never becomes what you think it will. Here is a little story on how things can get bad very quickly. I had a woman who worked for me who asked for permission to be involved in a film about wedding dresses that was being shot about the designer of her wedding dress (she needed press clearance given the business we were in). I told her it was fine but could never be filmed at the office nor could the name of the firm be mentioned in the filming. I questioned her on why she was even contemplating doing it and she just felt it was "cool" -- see her name in the credits -- get her twenty minutes of fame. After the segment was done - the film was sold to another production company who proceeded to slice and dice it and subsequently, unbeknownst to this woman, became the original "Bridezillas" pilot. She was made to look like a fool - she was embarrassed and mortified when people in the industry (like her colleagues and clients) recognized her from that show. So think long and hard before you mingle with the press....you never know what you are signing up for and they take HUGE liberties at your expense in order to make their story sound sensational.
|
|
|
Post by adamthompson32 on Oct 2, 2012 17:00:32 GMT -8
Well I don't really qualify there, being one of the "small people". Wait, how did the Fortune guy get in contact with you? I thought you were more anonymous than _I_ was... The writer emailed someone he knew who emailed a buddy of mine that has invested millions in AAPL on my recommendation over the years. My buddy forwarded it to me. I would do it in a nanosecond but can't in my new profession. I'm kind of hoping Turley, Deagol, Gregg, and some other smart folks will do it so they can get the facts out there some more about why AAPL has been, and still is, a home run investment opportunity.
|
|
|
Post by phoebear611 on Oct 2, 2012 18:23:14 GMT -8
If you could craft the line up it would be great to help get the word out but tread lightly - good luck
|
|
|
Post by mbeauch on Oct 2, 2012 19:35:26 GMT -8
Articles have been done on this before. To engage in this would be foolish IMO. I always revert back to my simple system, what is the upside? nothing.
|
|
|
Post by Luckychoices on Oct 2, 2012 21:33:22 GMT -8
Here's what the guy emailed me about the story when I asked a couple follow-up questions in response to his initial email. "I'm looking for investors who have most of their money in Apple and who have had the position for years -- at least since 2007 but preferably longer. The goal, basically, is to tell the story of a handful of Apple investors whose conviction was so high that they ignored the early AAPL skeptics, bucked all the traditional diversification advice doled out by investment writers like myself, and in doing so made themselves wildly rich during an era when the stock market probably destroyed more wealth than it created." My wife and I would fit all those parameters. Until we retired(me in 2008 and her in 2011) we were only able to invest 75% of our 401K's into Apple but all IRA's and other investments were 100% Apple. Now that we've been able to roll over our 401k's, it's 100% Apple and only Apple. That being said, I'm more than a little leery of being interviewed for a story like this. The media in general doesn't seem to really be prone to positive stories about Apple.
|
|
|
Post by Lstream on Oct 2, 2012 21:44:35 GMT -8
There is a side effect to be interviewed like this. Financial planners, both legit and otherwise, insurance salesmen, and various forms of parasites watch for articles where they can learn of people who have achieved some success. Anyone who participates in such an article should expect a lot of unwanted attention, no matter what it says or accurately written it is.
|
|
|
Post by Luckychoices on Oct 2, 2012 21:49:18 GMT -8
There is a side effect to be interviewed like this. Financial planners, both legit and otherwise, insurance salesmen, and various forms of parasites watch for articles where they can learn of people have achieved some success. Anyone who participates in such an article should expect a lot of unwanted attention, no matter what it says or accurately written it is. Yet another good point, Lstream. Thanks for mentioning it.
|
|
|
Post by phoebear611 on Oct 3, 2012 15:27:56 GMT -8
There is a side effect to be interviewed like this. Financial planners, both legit and otherwise, insurance salesmen, and various forms of parasites watch for articles where they can learn of people have achieved some success. Anyone who participates in such an article should expect a lot of unwanted attention, no matter what it says or accurately written it is. Yet another good point, Lstream. Thanks for mentioning it. I am sure that the reporter would allow you to just go on a first name basis.
|
|
JDSoCal
Member
Aspiring oligarch
Posts: 4,182
|
Post by JDSoCal on Oct 3, 2012 15:33:21 GMT -8
Yet another good point, Lstream. Thanks for mentioning it. I am sure that the reporter would allow you to just go on a first name basis. Exactly, it's not like they will be posting your home address and SSN's. It could be a good opportunity to be an AAPL evangelist, just like we do here. A chance to lay out the fundamental case that we are always bemoaning never gets out on CNBC.
|
|
|
Post by mbeauch on Oct 3, 2012 19:26:17 GMT -8
I am sure that the reporter would allow you to just go on a first name basis. Exactly, it's not like they will be posting your home address and SSN's. It could be a good opportunity to be an AAPL evangelist, just like we do here. A chance to lay out the fundamental case that we are always bemoaning never gets out on CNBC. OK James, why don't you take the lead.
|
|
|
Post by princessgrace on Oct 4, 2012 9:05:13 GMT -8
Works for me. Go Apple No 5! ;D
|
|
Mav
Member
[img style="max-width:100%;" alt=" " src="http://www.forumup.it/images/smiles/simo.gif"]
Posts: 10,784
|
Post by Mav on Oct 4, 2012 10:58:29 GMT -8
No. ...5...?
|
|
|
Post by adamthompson32 on Oct 5, 2012 8:16:12 GMT -8
|
|
|
Post by adamthompson32 on Dec 6, 2012 9:01:07 GMT -8
|
|
Mav
Member
[img style="max-width:100%;" alt=" " src="http://www.forumup.it/images/smiles/simo.gif"]
Posts: 10,784
|
Post by Mav on Dec 6, 2012 10:31:07 GMT -8
Not as bad an article as I thought it might've turned out.
|
|