When I say be wary about the motivation of any poster, what I mean is: if the poster would not buy the stock on a PE of 12, you waste your time holding your breath for a different message @ 36?

Let's tell the truth here: a lot of forumites have been banging the drum for a reversal for almost as long as they have been marching on the wrong foot.

That is a tough one.
I personally allocate 25-30% (that is an individual choice and is based on some actual research into the specific companies including come of the companies they themselves invest in)

One way could be to look at how much of your daily time is attached to the main offerings from those companies (ie how long are you on some Google offerings, Youtube, Maps, social media etc) and work a % based on that). You could also look around your surroundings and see how much of your workplace is surrounded by such offerings.

To me what the mega tech companies "sell" is solutions to corporates and.
What they "buy" from retail customers is time.
The clever thing is the arbitrage that takes place.

Retail clients themselves pay to sell their time to the mega techs and the mega techs use that money to develop solutions for the corporates they sell to generate revenues - be it ads or cloud services. It is the old model of an exclusive membership to get access to a trendy club completely re-engineered.

I don't think it's worth trying to outguess the market.

That's what market efficiency means – not that the market's always right, just that it's factoring in more information than you are ... and no amount of money or resources (e.g. those of a major bank) could build a team that are going to be able to outguess the market at a rate better than chance.

The idea that we're too concentrated in Mag7 stocks isn't based on any real analysis. It's just a current neurosis. It was US stocks and CAPE ratios 10 years ago. You could split a business like Apple or Amazon up into 8 smaller businesses, and scatter them throughout the S&P, and it'd amount to the same thing – only one would be a software business, a hardware business, a communications business, a VC fund, etc.

Not so.
Look throughout history, key decisions and asset allocation has as much bearing as the information and product itself on returns.

Apple was dead and heading towards the graveyards by the decisions of the soda dude.
Blockbuster exploded by rejecting Netflix
Ebay almost died trying to copy Amazon.
They all had the same information at that point in time - they just different views and made choices accordingly

The magic information formula you keep referring to is and has always been out there,. It the decisions you make with it and the capital you deploy towards ideas that play a huge role in returns.

Google has vasts amount of information (as does Ebay) but it needs to make use of it in a meaningful way to be successful and then allocate resources towards a chosen path.

I always like the analogy of Water - 2/3 of the world and your body is full of it. It is free and accessible to all (ok I overlook the places which have drought)
Yet some genius thought what if we bottle it and sell it we could make a trillion dollar industry out of it. Sure it will add costs but mankind will still buy it.

In much the same way, Apple developed a large portable hard disk and sold it has ipods and came back from the dead. The information (and product in both cases) was already there just not the way you imagined it.

The likes of MSFT, Google had both the data and information but Amazon made AWS into the largest cloud service provider. Today whilst everyone is busy developing proprietary AI, the likes of Amazon went open source and were happy to use all of them including Deepseek and guess what - yesterday they just moved to the leaders not by having a better model but simply by allowing all of them in their eco system.

So when a company incubates many companies they make an active choice on the views they have. SO 8 separate companies will have 8 heads and will look at things in 8 different ways and make 8 different allocation choices.

Are you planning on making changes to the allocations at all.
Reason for asking is that the growth of Apple has led it to be way way ahead for many and whilst the headlines such as Buffet selling Apple makes a big noise and gives reporters something to talk about, the fact is that a lot of his overweight and size was growth itself.