Interesting how just weeks ago, before the fed rate pause, analysts were hammering Apple's price target down to 60. Some even had worse sentiment not mentioning, becuase it simply shows how narrowminded analysts can be. In fact, I love playing against the analysts advice. I love gaming analysts. Opportunity is found in what the market is not paying attention to, or has got all wrong. I ask myself if any of the analysts assigned to Apple even own an iPod or really are inspired by the business model, the process, the creativity. One of my biggest rules to investing is to only invest in tangible companies: one's you have first experience with, be it on a consumer or professional level. I guess I can't blame the analysts, as they have to play risk-averse ball in order to appease the masses. No one wants to lose their retirement on tech (again) right? I don't have to play no contact, however, and if the anlaysts had picked up on the subtle clue in the quarterly report given by the Apple CFO that the iPhone was indeed a reality, you could have caught Apple at low 60's. Now, Apple does happen to be up 8% in two days

since the announcement of the iPhone, and the analysts are of course, upgrading after the stock has already gone up. Thank the analysts when the stock pulls back as most would after such a rally (hint: if I bought Apple at 50, its recent 52 week low, I would consider selling at 72, lest I be considered greedy. You can't beat 50% in 3 months on a blue-chip). I set my target price for Apple at 75. I'm going to play hardball and ride it out to 85 just to save commissions on the sale. I strongly believe in setting targets for stock plays, as opposed to Index funds. Set a goal, score and go home. Don't expect lightning to keep striking in the same place indefinitely. Same goes for any gamble. That's why I've never lost money gambling. I wish I could say the same for the stock market. :) And yes, I'm even more excited about the iPhone! My mobile contracts about to expire and my beloved SE t610 is on it's last legs after 3 years of dutiful service.

Whew! After the Fed maintained rates, the market finally grew some confidence, replenishing support levels for several of my long positions. If you've been keeping track, I went long on Whole Foods (WFMI

) after it fell from 64. I dug deeper at 55 and even at 47, after the stock went through a cyclically enforced multiple contraction: basically, Whole Foods' stock was expensive relative to other peers in the food industry, such as Safeway and Krogers. It's PE was up in the 50's, while the competitors were half that amount. Hence, in a time of economic uncertainty, investors will not pay for stocks that are at a premium to earnings - in fact, those who are risk averse will actually short these positions and reap the earnings thus far, subsequently dropping the share price for others. Now, as I learned with Apple, high profile stocks with high multiples are very market sensitive, and are the first to fall to cyclical impacts. However, despite my humble and limited experience, I have learned that staring at chart prices is a complete waste of time - as you are not looking at the long term prospects. The question I asked myself when Apple tanked from 60 to 50 the day after I bought it, was the same question I asked with Whole Foods fall from 64 to 47.

Did anything about the underlying fundamentals of the business change?

The answer was no. Did the competition overtake? Did the company make a poor fiscal choices? Did management jump ship? Did any experience on a consumer level hint that the jig was up?

No.

So what's the explanation? Most investors, I'd hate to admit, are not looking at the long term. Long term wisdom is rare and it defines a successful investor (or gambler, for that matter). If you know something the market doesn't (or doesn't want to listen to because they are being emotional) then you have an edge.

I've learned it's a rookie move to bail on a stock (or mutual fund) if for only the stock price drops. Sure, this sounds obvious. However, you'll never truly know how it feels untill  you have a sizeable position, lets say,$10,000 in a fund, and it depreciates by $3,000. This happened to me with  Vanguards International flagship (VTRIX

). It's doubled for me in the past few years thanks to expansion in emerging markets, so when I lost almost 60% of that growth in this past May's bleeding, I panicked and I sold. Man, I have a knack for selling. Would you believe I sold at the absolute low, the trough at 35 before it immeidately ran back to the 40's?

Sweet. Selling actually cost me that $3000 I earned. Had I sit tight and researched more before pulling the trigger, I would have realized the truth behind my newest favorite saying:

Selling does not erase the loss. If it's down already, hold ship.

If you think about this, this strategy is (practically) infallible in the long term. The stocks will rebound just by the nature of economic expansion, even if by just accounting population growth. In other words, for one to state the market will not rebound (or grow) is not have confidence in economic expansion, period. In which case, we have a lot more to worry about than the market.

Selling should only be qualified by a change in fundamentals, market cycles or ... selling into strength. As in, you've made sizeable gains, and it doesn't pay to be greedy. Even the best play will sour at some point, when the big boys call the game over.

Now, having learned that lesson (from hard-learned experience, not just from a book), and the lesson of Apple, I applied this to Whole Foods. Did it bounce back from 47? Yes, its at 55 now. Why did I buy? Becuase the fundamentals didn't change from the time I bought at 64. Yes, the market was not favoring the stock in this cycle, but cycles come to a close. When the economy rebounds, Whole Foods will be dramatically undervalued. I've already made 18% on the play at 47. When it rolls back to 64, I'll have made nearly a 50% gain on the 47 buy.

All this tells me is that I bought WFMI too early. Sure, easy to say with 20/20 hindsight. Did I research? Sure, in fact it was down from 80, so 64 seemed like there was a misvaluation. Truth be told, this is my first market cycle to contend with, and I need to ride them out a few times to place my bets at better times.

Such is the fun of investing.