Talk:Growth stock

Business High‑importance

	Business portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Business, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of business articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.BusinessWikipedia:WikiProject BusinessTemplate:WikiProject BusinessWikiProject Business articles
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

Finance & Investment Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Finance & Investment, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of articles related to Finance and Investment on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Finance & InvestmentWikipedia:WikiProject Finance & InvestmentTemplate:WikiProject Finance & InvestmentFinance & Investment articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Please define

Question for 67.119... What do you mean when you say: Return from the original investment based on the earnings price paid. I have not heard this terminology before. My guess is that you mean an appreciation in the value of the investment, but you have deleted this when I tried to clarify the sentence, so I have to assume you mean something else. Please explain what this sentence means. mydogategodshat 15:22, 5 Apr 2004 (UTC)

Cleanup

I marked this article for cleanup for any number of reasons. It is faintly, consistently un-encyclopedic; this makes it read like a tiny fly hovering just far enough from my ear for me to wonder if I'm imagining it. In terms of content, it alternates between chatty "For Dummies" explanations and stripped-down GMAT prep-level finance with no clear transition and minimal internal organization. While there is quite a bit of good explanation here, this article needs a LOT of work before it can treat its subject matter the way it deserves. Kajerm 07:08, 29 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You are right, there are even a few fallacies, but this just reflects the magical / mystical approaches generally applied to growth stocks. You cannot fight numerology or creeds, they are the stuff holy bubbles are made of ;-) --Pgreenfinch 07:21, 29 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

A shame too, as I was looking for some ideas to counterbalance old-school value investing theories. I'm trying to get my finance feet wet and this article is a big old jellyfish in the water. Any good references for me? Kajerm 15:16, 29 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I think it needs to be explained that "growth" is considered the pseduo-mirror of "value" stocks. People buy growth stocks in the hopes that they will increase in value in the future. People buy "value" stocks, because they believe they are undervalued. Of course, there is some cross over with both. Calexo 07:22, 10 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The most recent edit is very much a step in the right direciton. Well done. I think with some more examples and attention, this could be a very solid article. -- Kajerm

July 2007 cleanup

I cut out much of the information in this article and restored the old definition which was more accurate. The article before my edits didn't really apply to the subject matter. This article is specifically about Growth stocks (Hence the title), not about investment strategy. It's now a stub and needs to be expanded. --Lendorien 14:11, 18 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Growth stock. Please take a moment to review my edit. You may add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it, if I keep adding bad data, but formatting bugs should be reported instead. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether, but should be used as a last resort. I made the following changes:

Attempted to fix sourcing for http://planning.tdameritrade.com/srl/tda/library_article.jsp?tid=0039&client=tda&catid=000646

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 21:53, 29 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]