Quite recently Saul posted that he was wrong about AAPL, they have defied the odds and continued to grow at a handsome clip.
I’m one of these people that really wants to have a finger in every pie. Every time I see opportunity, I want a piece of it. One of the hardest things for me is keeping my portfolio from ballooning into dozens of companies. I’ve gotten a lot better at that over the past year, though, since Saul started this board.
I think one of the more valuable lessons for me is that it doesn’t matter how things perform that you don’t invest in – all that matter is what you do invest in.
Two companies have nice growth potential, one seems to have much better odds of it. So you buy that one, and both actually do well. Does that mean you made a mistake not buying the other? No. Your money is in a good performing company, and you made the choice that you believed carried less risk.
I think we all see companies from time to time that clearly have potential, but we pass on for one reason or another. As long as the company we do ultimately choose for that portion of our portfolio does well, it doesn’t matter that we passed on the others. And there may actually be an advantage to owning the one we like, since we may not be as skittish about it.
Anyway, as you’ve said, Saul makes mistakes (including with companies he does invest in – AEYE and KRED come to mind). Everyone should do their own research, make their own assessments, and come to their own independent conclusions about each opportunity. We’re all adults here 
Now I own AAPL, and have since 2004 or 2005, so I obviously stuck with it too But I think it presents a lesson: even though AAPL has done better than Saul expected, his portfolio hasn’t been hurt by his decision to pass on it. It’s okay to pass on companies with potential if you’ve found other ones that you think have more potential or better odds of realizing their potential.
Neil
Long AAPL