Share
459 Posts.
lightbulb Created with Sketch. 43
clock Created with Sketch.
02/05/19
15:16
Share
Originally posted by Roy2U:
↑
pilatus, I respect your investment decision not to invest in unprofitable companies. I used to lean very much that way myself, but kept seeing many examples of innovative companies increasing share prices by often 5x, 10x, even 100x while still not making profits. One notable example is Amazon which took until 2016 to start making regular profits. Its share price in 2015, when they had another loss was over $600, when it was only $1.50 in 1997. Then there are all of those Australian loss-makers listed today by crystalblue. All of them large multi-baggers. I concluded that as an investor, I should not leave all of these large gains to others, so am now prepared to invest in not-yet profitable companies. I got into NEA around 62.5 cents. I was happy with that, as I could see that their Australian operation was a proven success and was generating cash flow for their (loss making) investment into the US which was already looking good. Amazon sacrificed profits for revenue growth and market power in their early years, and NEA is doing the same with their geographical expansions. Anyway, you are not alone in deciding not to invest in non-profitable companies, and I hope you do well with your investments.
Expand
I concluded that as an investor, I should not leave all of these large gains to others I've also came to the same decision. NEA is an ideal trend following stock. Fundamental investors may want to look elsewhere for now. Both schools have valid ways of thinking, but often play in different playgrounds.
Last edited by
Zaxon :
02/05/19