Poor Bill Miller. After seeing his Cal Ripken-esque 15-year streak of beating the market end in 2006, he's trailing the S&P 500 again in 2007. His investors at the $21 billion Legg Mason Value Trust were probably content to laugh off the end of his run, but another off-year in 2007 could raise some eyebrows. Is Bill Miller finished, some will ask? Or, can he make a comeback amid mounting pressure to deliver returns to shareholders?

When asked about whether his amazing run was just a fluke, Miller replied by pointing out that the odds of beating the market every year from 1991 to 2005 are about 1 in 2.3 million. "So there was probably some skill involved... On the other hand, something with odds of 1 in 2.3 million happens to about 130 people per day in the U.S., so you never know."

I wouldn't give up on Bill Miller just yet. He's one of the greatest investing minds ever, and I would look for him to regain his form. And if he doesn't? Well then he just be another member of the 90% of mutual fund managers who don't beat the market.

Bill Miller, the stock-picking wizard behind the Legg Mason Value Trust Fund that has outperformed the S&P 500 index for 15 -- yes, fifteen -- consecutive years, is finally eating a little exhaust. This year, the 500-stock index (which will likely finish up more than 14% year-to-date) will outdistance Miller's fund by a wide margin, thanks to the fund's precipitous summer swoon.

Concerns are mounting that Miller, whose fund's sheer size is limiting its flexibility, might have reached the end of the golden path. Investors can't help but overwhelm a good thing, and Miller's success with contrarian plays has garnered so much attention that whatever he does can convert contrarianism into mainstreamism. He made some bold moves in tech bellwethers Yahoo! Inc. (NASDAQ: YHOO), eBay Inc. (NASDAQ: EBAY), and Amazon.com Inc. (NASDAQ: AMZN) that didn't play out, and he placed a lot of faith in homebuilders when the softening housing market sent many to the cashier.

But most investors who've ridden this far with him are reluctant to jump off the gravy after one poor year (which, really, was only a poor four months). The fund has outperformed the S&P's torrid run since August, and many of Miller's current holdings -- such as UnitedHealth Group Inc. (NYSE: UNH), Aetna Inc. (NYSE: AET), KB Home (NYSE: KBH), and Pulte Homes Inc. (NYSE: PHM) -- seem poised to rebound from their lower valuations and enjoy a solid '07.

Too much is being made of the end of his 15-year streak. It's an abstract idea based on an arbitrary 12-month cycle. Miller has a basket of goodies and a boatload of momentum heading into the new year. Anyone who cashes out on him now is nuts.

How in the world is Amazon.com, Inc. (NASDAQ:AMZN) holding on to its stock price? Who is supporting these outrageous figures? Why is there no profit taking? Do investors think it's going higher still, without the profits to back it up? Are investors buying CEO Jeffrey P. Bezos's mystic ethos?

For starters the shares are controlled by surprisingly few entities. If I am reading the data correctly, Jeffrey Bezos owns 101,198,359 shares as of October 27, 2006. Legg Mason Inc. holds another 98,122,167shares and TCW, Inc. controls another 26,971,084 shares, both as of June 30, 2006. That means that approximately 60% of the shares are held by three entities.

Looking still further, insiders control 25.22% of the outstanding shares and institutions control 73.20% for a total of 98.42% which means individual investors own only 1.58% of the outstanding shares. For comparison Google Inc. (NASDAQ:GOOG) insiders and Institutions control 87.45%, leaving individual investors with 12.55%. Seems the small guy remains at the mercy of the big players and will likely be left without a seat when the music stops. With a price to earnings ratio hovering between 54 and 56 lately there is not much room for error (actually none) so the the true believers better be right.

Am I the only one bewildered at Amazon's stock price. I don't think so.

Another concern brewing: Are increasing marketing expenditures cutting into profits?

The latest from Business Week provides some insight into Jeff Bezos's gamble on becoming a platform player. Just because Bezos chooses to gamble does not mean the individual investor should. After all, he is gambling with your money -- especially when you consider the inflated stock price.

Someone once told me about a person new to the investment world who got a hot tip on a stock that was trading at a good price with strong market possibilities. He asked his broker to buy 500 shares. The stock went up, so he bought another 500 shares. It continued to rise in price and he felt he had really got a good tip and wanted to take full advantage of it before it made a major move so he bought 4,000 more shares. Sure enough the stock popped the very next day. His confidence beaming, he called his broker to buy another 5,000 shares -- doubling his position. His broker tried to discourage him telling him there were no sure things but he insisted and his broker reluctantly increased his position to 10,000 shares. By the end of the week he was up 200%. Not wanting to let his greed get the best of him he decided he had made enough so he called his broker and asked him to sell out his position. The broker replied, "to whom? You're the only one buying."

If so many Amazon shares are in the hands of Legg Mason and it decides to take some profits, who will they sell to? Jeff Bezos has often proven to be insightful and inspirational, but I would keep my eye on a seat just in case that music stops.

Interested in reading more? Check out my other posts for Bloggingstocks here.

Sheldon Liber is the CEO of a small private investment company and the vice president for Design and Research of an architecture & planning firm.

Late last week, the legendary mutual fund manager, Bill Miller, published his quarterly report to shareholders of Legg Mason Value Trust (LMVTX). For each of the past 15 years -- despite much tumult -- he has beaten the S&P 500.

Although, as for this year, his performance has been subpar (but, hey, there is still time left for him to make a comeback). Nonetheless he says he is "somewhere between bullish and very bullish."

OK, so what stocks is Miller focused on?

He only mentioned one: Amazon.com, Inc. (Nasdaq: AMZN). Keep in mind that Miller is a well-known intellectual, who routinely quotes obscure authors, scientists, and philosophers when describing his analysis of stocks. In other words, might he be interested in Amazon.com because he's a big-time customer?

Perhaps. But Miller thinks that Amazon.com has a powerful business model -- which is likely to see increased operating margins. If correct, he thinks investors will get an "excess return." Yes, with phrases like that, he is definitely the intellectual type.

Tom Taulli is the author of various books, including the Complete M&A Handbook and operates InvestorOffering.com.

MOST NOTEWORTHY: Broadcom (BRCM) and News Corp (NWS, NWS.A) top today's extensive list of downgrades.

• Broadcom Corp (NASDAQ: BRCM) was downgraded by JMP Securities to Market Underperform from Market Perform, citing valuation and the chance of cautious guidance for the December quarter.
• Soleil Securities downgraded News Corp Ltd. (NYSE: NWS, NWS.A) to Sell from Hold citing the company's deteriorating asset efficiency following the change in senior management compensation structure.

OTHER DOWNGRADES:

• Lower than expected September traffic and unit revenue estimates forced Calyon Securities to downgrade US Airways Group Inc. (NYSE: LCC) to Add from Buy.
• The negative pre-announcement from Legg Mason Inc. (NYSE: LM) triggered downgrades from Freidman Billings Ramsey, to Underperform from Market Perform, and Merrill Lynch, to Sell from Buy.
• And finally, Freescale Semiconductor Inc (NYSE: FSL, FSL.B) was downgraded to Hold from Buy at Citigroup after the consortium led by the BlackStone Group made the company an offer to take them private.

Analyst summaries provided by TheFlyOnTheWall.com (subscription required).

Here's another shocker: I LIKE GOOGLE BETTER THAN AMAZON!!!

I have written many times that I think Google is overvalued and the stock price should come down. It has and it will continue to do so. So all you dreamers of further upside pops should temper your outlook. Long term it goes up, but for now it goes down, and it will never equal the valuation of GE or Exxon.

However, I have been down on Amazon for years, right from the time of the IPO. People have made great sums and lost great sums on this stock and the price has always been a joke to me. I consider Jeff Bezos to be very bright and yet I view him as the Flim Flam Man. I used to call him "smilin' Jack", almost has a kind of mad man's glow to him, like Nero... He just needs the fiddle.

Amazon is one of my favorite targets and it was one of the issues that brought me to the attention of financial editors years ago.

The Numbers. As I write, Google's P/E is 56 and I think fair value should be closer to 40. I cannot see looking at it for investment until it moves down another 50 to 60 dollars.

Amazon on the other hand has a P/E around 36. Even after its partial free fall this week, I still think that the P/E is nuts. People have been comparing it to an Internet company and that's a mistake. Yahoo is an Internet company, Google is an Internet company, even News Corp with MySpace is an Internet company. Amazon is a sales company.

If you read any of the many business magazines that I read (which is most of them), you will find that they give some very good advice regarding the benefits of investing in Index Funds over the long haul. However, once a year they publish things like the "Top 1,000 Funds" and variations on this theme. To me this contradicts their year-round advice just to generate an extra issue that serves no purpose except to confuse investors. I think 90% of the 1,000 funds are garbage and exist only to generate revenue for the investment company. They cater to a public fascinated by quantity of choice and various meaningless nuances and not by good sense.

Most of the data I have seen supports the premise that index investing (notably the S&P 500) beats stock picking (higher Internal Rate of Return (IRR)) over any 20 year period you choose. Plus, it has the added benefit of less market volatility. This makes it the optimal choice for most people. This is even more true when you consider taxes and fees.

Furthermore, if it were not true then investment guru and fund manager Bill Miller of Legg Mason would not be such a celebrity for beating the Standard & Poor's index for 14 years running. Have you read about any others? NO! There are many advisor's who may beat the index funds for a period of time, but not a long period, and it is usually not the same ones.

Business publications, such as Time Warner's Money and Fortune, should have a disclaimer accompanying their fund reviews. Or, giving them the benefit of the doubt, perhaps I should view these mag-rags as the publisher's way of giving us an opportunity to see for ourselves that none of these funds provide much added value -- unless you own the fund company.