[sinsin07]

While I agree that the original comment is a logical fallacy ( hoc ergo propter hoc or correlation proves causation) I would have to disagree on preconceived notions.

North America breeds individuals and individualist culture. The whole society is based on consumerism built into its core and that is reflected through everything, including family relations. There is a huge driving force in North America behind ensuring that each individual grows up thinking that they are best off functioning and living as an individual, avoiding sharing, giving, long term relationships, attachment, etc. Everything revolves around "me" and instant gratification. This is inherently at odds with what a family stands for and what community building is all about. Further to this, because of the high living standard there is little need to band together as a community and function as a unit to get things done. Simply put, if one's life is pretty good on one's own, then there is no need for that one to band with others to raise their living standard.

If you actually do some research into sociology, psychology, and psychiatry, you will find very hard research that shows these things to be facts, not opinions. I encourage you to do so. Maybe you will understand the world around you a bit better...of if you are too lazy to do that, tell me how many of your family members and your friends family members are around every week doing something as a community and how many of your neighbors do you actually know and socialize with on regular basis?

Don't knock things you know nothing about. Even if you can single out experiences from other areas that show that there are issues of detachment and narcissistic type of individualism present, that still does nothing to refute very known facts about North America. If it makes you feel any better, UK, Germany, and a few other Northern European countries also have some of these issues, but not as bad as the cases present in North America.

Probably explains why the US is a superpower and most of the "community" countries are not.

[palmless]

At this moment, RIM is at $14.88 up 2.13% over yesterday.

Also, share price isnt a good comparison as no two companies have the same number of shares so even if the companies were of equal value the share prices would still be different.

Good point... using today's closes...

If AAPL and RIMM had the same number of shares, and AAPL were to remain at $497.67, RIMM would be at $8.32.

If AAPL and RIMM had the same number of shares, and RIMM were to remain at $14.80, AAPL would be at $885.52.

That makes the 100:1 value ratio easier to spot.

[dagerlach]

The market will chase a rising stock. It doesn't care too much about the quality of the widget the company produces or the management at the helm until to stock is in decline. Then everyone wants details.

[Chinookman]

Read this and want to share with all:
Research In Motion Value Trap: Capitalizing On A Degenerative Business - Seeking Alpha


The bias is pretty sad but the rebuttals are well written so if you're long on RIM good for you....

[palmless]

Read this and want to share with all:
Research In Motion Value Trap: Capitalizing On A Degenerative Business - Seeking Alpha


The bias is pretty sad but the rebuttals are well written so if you're long on RIM good for you....

Good read, solid analysis.

Summarizing the rebuttals, all seem to be variations of "Nah Nah, BB rulez FTW, Prem Watsa=Infallible".

One good thing pointed out, *ONLY* RIMM trumpets their subscriber growth in units, the rest of the industry publishes share. With a market growing this fast, everyone grows units, and only share matters.

[erodenero]

"watsa" ....hes not sherlock's assistant ^

[dagerlach]

Palmless,

Matt Siper is a day trader. He's writing a blog hoping he can somehow influence the market.

dg

[palmless]

Palmless,

Matt Siper is a day trader. He's writing a blog hoping he can somehow influence the market.

dg

Oh, I'm well past the stage where I ignore the argument and focus on the person.

His argument is sound, very difficult to counter. When I can read it and see this facts are accurate and his logic is sound, I don't care if he's Hannibal Lechter.

If I were wanting to support Blackberry, I'd try to counter some of his facts. Much more effective than an ad hominem attack, which tells the world I have no counter for his argument.

[dagerlach]

Palmless,

You simply can not ignore the fact that this article is intended to persuade a RIMM stockholder to sell. Thus, logic would dictate that the author most likely has a position where he will benefit from a drop in the stock price of RIMM. Understanding this allows you to recognize that their is a strategic bias to the article. Given this bias, do you really think the author has given you a clear insight with which to base a financial decision?

[palmless]

Palmless,

You simply can not ignore the fact that this article is intended to persuade a RIMM stockholder to sell. Thus, logic would dictate that the author most likely has a position where he will benefit from a drop in the stock price of RIMM. Understanding this allows you to recognize that their is a strategic bias to the article. Given this bias, do you really think the author has given you a clear insight with which to base a financial decision?

"Disclosure: I have no positions in any stocks mentioned, but may initiate a short position in RIMM over the next 72 hours."

He's either lying, or the article hurts his plans.

If you look at it from the standpoint of "Negative facts about RIMM, guy must be up to no good", you'll always find what you seek. I'm looking at it from the standpoint of "Inarguably verifiable facts about RIMM (which, generally, are going to be bad, given that most CURRENT facts about RIMM's performance and situation are unfavorable), and his analysis is good. Who cares that he discloses a plan to short the stock.

If we disregarded the analysis of everyone who doesn't believe in RIMM, we're left with Prem Watsa, JimMike, Crackberry Nation, the mayor of Waterloo, and some retired NHL players. I'm looking for a broader view.

[app_Developer]

Thus, logic would dictate that the author most likely has a position where he will benefit from a drop in the stock price of RIMM.

Oh, so in your mind it's not possible to simply and honestly believe that RIMM as further to fall? Everyone who says that RIMM has further to fall is necessarily being dishonest and is trying to move the whole market?