Yes with some exclusions. Dividend payers, I am holding. Partially selling some of the 20% or above profited companies to release some cash as I am fully 100% invested. Limit orders are already set. If that limit is hit, it will be sold on Monday. Rest I hold them. LMT, QCOM, BA, CSCO, AAPL, part of NVDA (bought $97) are not sale. TSLA is the only exception not for sale.
Companies like SHOP, TDOC…etc are risky one at this stage, on sale as they are still in profit side.
From WSJ
Gravity is a bitch
All my stocks are not for sale…
Define timeframe 
otherwise not saying much just like buy low sell high, be fearful when people are greedy and vice versa…
Are you saying another ATH will happen within 1 month or 1 year, 5 years, 10 years or …? FANG + major tech stocks are below ATH now.
No for AAPLs. Stocks in mad money account are always being traded regardless of market conditions. Closed nearly all early in the week… dropped $400 from ATH since last Friday’s close.
Please share your conclusion 
, NVDA could replace NFLX from FANG , already higher than NFLX in market cap. However, having rallied 8 folds within 2 years, correcting 10-20% might be in the cards.
No conclusions on NVDA yet. Need to learn more. The most convincing bull case I heard so far is Huang’s argument that Nvidia is to parallel processing as Intel is to serial. We now have important workloads like AR/VR and AI that are very successfully addressed by parallel algo.
Nvidia is already half of Intel’s market cap. I am not yet convinced Nvidia can ever be as big as Intel. Intel’s real weapon is the x86 patent portfolio, an insurmountable moat in the Wintel days. Not sure Nvidia has that kind of moat.
Thanks. You knew more than I do The reason why I’m trading it is to force myself to find out more about this company. Previously you mention Google’s TPU could be in direct competition to NVDA’s products. Do you still view this as a threat?
I also have some LQMT and AMBA.
Google’s TPU is a real threat. I would be very curious if Amazon has something similar in their labs, and whether some other semi companies are looking into it.
That’s the fundamental weakness of nvidia. Seems to me now the only moat they have is the head start they had. There is nothing ground breaking in GPU. Apple is making its own for example. You can’t be a monopoly in tech with only tech. You need something more. In intels case it’s their x86 lock-in. Which is fading away by the way and so the company is dying.
They are more than data center though. They are becoming huge in automotive. They are just scratching the surface there. If you think self-Devon get cars will be mainstream, it’ll be with NVDA processors. There is risk, but it’s not like Google would monetize the processors and sell them to others. It’s be similar to What Apple did with PA semi. It’d eliminate a potential customer. I wonder how much of their revenue is google?
My knowledge of semi is skin-deep. From daily price chart, this current correction should bring it down to $130-$135 so looking forward to short some $130 puts in addition to previous 2 short $135 Aug puts. If I’m wrong, it rallies from here, I got to keep the premium. If I’m right, can consider buying the shares when it declines to $130-$135 and even calls 
depending on sentiments.
I am looking for some unfair advantage for nvidia. Just better technology is not sufficient for an enduring franchise. For Facebook we literally have networking effort working for it. For Amazon we have a vase fulfillment network that’s extremely cost prohibitive to build.
So what’s it for nvidia? Why can’t AMD undercut it? Like I said even Apple is building its own GPU, and there are many fabless companies selling IP.
Long term, there is no sustainable moat
AMZN’s in-house demand fulfillment would be cash draining if demand is too low.
FB’s networking effect would speed up its demise since bad things replicate fast.
Not many tech companies last more than 100 years.
IBM was founded 105 years ago. Any others?
Glory days of tech companies don’t seem to last long
Hp founded in 1939.
Intel founded in 1968.
Microsoft founded in 1975.
Seagate Technology founded in 1975.
Oracle founded in 1977.
Dell founded in 1984.
Cisco founded in 1984.
Many once great tech companies that ceased to be independent or insolvent = Sun, Compaq, EMC, DEC, Cray…
I am not looking for 100 years franchise. That may be too much to ask. But great companies like HP, intel and Microsoft dominated for 2 to 3 decades. That’s what I am not looking for.
The four companies in my portfolio: Facebook, Apple, Amazon and Tencent I am pretty confident will be dominant 10 years later, maybe even 20. Not yet convinced nvidia is that kind of company.
What’s the moat of Apple? Samsung plus google already replicated it…
Apple is the only one tech company that owns the whole stack from phone design down to CPU and software. No one else has that wide span of expertise.
With ARKit in iOS 11 Apple suddenly overtakes everybody and becomes the front runner in AR. That’s the power of owning the full stack.
Tech moves much faster now so any moat will be shorter. Also, we reach saturation of the technology must faster. How many years did it take for almost every home to have a radio vs. TV, vs. PC vs. cell phone vs. a smart phone? Adoption happens much faster, so you get a faster growth curve, but it reaches saturation of the market faster. After that, it’s a matter of how fast people are willing to upgrade.
I think we’ll see tech form a bottom tomorrow. It should until we get the next recession.
I doubt as tomorrow and Wednesday are FED hike day and market is speculating strongly 0.25 will be added on.FED is not going to hike further until Dec as they want to watch economy how it goes.
IMO, Knowing these details, market makers shedding all US based companies, including tech, now.
The fed hike has been known for months. Unless they hike by 0.5, then there’s no surprise there. The whole market isn’t going down. It’s very tech specific. Financials, energy, and industrials are up. Materials were up Friday. Those are all cyclicals that do well in a growing economy. That means people are still bullish on economic growth. It was mostly a sector rotation. I’m sure the tech run moved a lot of funds outside their target sector allocations. I’m surprised to see them re-balance so much mid-month, but it was bound to happen.
You have to remember the vast majority of money is trying to beat the S&P 500. They are going to stay relatively close to S&P 500 allocations and try to pick the best winners in each sector. When they get a few right, then they become too over weight that sector and have to trim their positions.
