The weird thing about the Nasdaq after the Fed's rate hike a week ago was that it traded higher the day afterwards. I suppose it was on the basis that some people thought that the Fed wouldn't tighten again, but looking at the comments from the Federal Open Markets Committee (FOMC) I think they're being overly optimistic.

Anyway the rise on Wednesday last was short-lived which makes me think that other people reckon rates will go up again too. As well as the usual post-hike commentary, FOMC governors Roger Ferguson and Michael Moskow were being pretty hawkish on inflationary threats and labour market tightness on Monday.

Additionally, we're now in a situation where short-term rates are edging above long-term rates. There are reasons (including the US Treasury's buybacks of bonds) which have kept longer-term rates lower but inverted yield curves, which is what is happening, tend to put a brake on economic growth which should mean a difficult time for equities.

As if most of this year hasn't really been difficult anyway. It shouldn't have been - it should have just been downhill all the way - but that never really happens and lures investors with false hopes.

So they will continue to look at stocks which have fallen sharply and think about putting them in their portfolios - and despite the rattle in the telecoms sector I still think that some of them have good prospects in the future.

But I also worry about how much money they have to spend to make those good prospects turn into good profits. Oh yes, the profit motif. So long lacking as a reason to buy anything it has begun to rear its head at last. Now investors are finally beginning to ask when and if some of their one-time darling stocks are going to make any money.

Not, of course, the investors in Boo.com who have had to bite the unpalatable bullet of the company's collapse.

When I first read about Boo last year I searched the Net for them and was able to pre-register my e-mail address so that when the site was finally up and running I'd be informed.

I think this pre-registering also entitled me to 10 per cent off my first shopping experience although that's only a vague memory and may not actually be the case. Since Boo didn't ever e-mail me to tell me that the site was up and running (and since it took months longer than it had initially expected) I kind of lost interest in it.

But eventually I remembered it and looked it up again. My computer (the old one) was far too low-tech to access the site. And even with the new, improved version, the download time was so long that I had long lost interest in buying whatever Boo had to offer.

I know nothing about the optimum speed levels an e-tailer needs to keep the customer interested, but if the customer is me, the answer is about 15 seconds max. The problem for the company was in trying to be too ambitious.

There is absolutely nothing more irritating for a potential client to be told that "it'll work soon" when it doesn't work now. I don't know how many times I've walked away from software packages, for example, when they've crashed during the demo.

Anyway, it seems that the glamour girl/boy management team of Boo spent lots and lots of money on advertising and marketing and also rushing around the globe, sparing no expense as they went. Which sounds awfully like many other dot.coms and very like the one we nearly all love to hate, good old lastminute.com.

Attractive boy/girl team there too, lots of advertising (although maybe not so much jetsetting) and a site which doesn't live up to expectations.

Not only that but a site that doesn't have all the right information. I did a trawl for some continental flights last week and it came up saying that there was nothing to match my criteria. Sorry, lastminute, but there was plenty. I found them myself.

The news stories are now focusing on the fact that many dot.coms will run out of money in the next few years - next few months is more likely because the reality is that sentiment has turned and it was sentiment that got them where they are now. Rising interest rates won't help matters.

At least Boo wasn't a listed company and so a whole heap of private investors didn't get burned but, sooner or later, they will. The other share-depressing factor is that, for many of the companies which floated in the last year or so, the directors will soon be able to sell their shares. Given that they know exactly how the cash-flow situation is faring and given that they'll want to actually get their hands on some of the money that the sales raised, I can't see them sitting on the sidelines and waiting for things to improve. Which will only makes things worse, as shareholders in Baltimore discovered, when Fran Rooney and other directors sold shares as soon as they were legally allowed. However, I suppose there'll still be plenty of trading going on both in new and old economy stocks for the rest of the year no matter how bumpy the ride. I was interested to read the views of Ruth O'Briain who now heads Friends First's asset management team. Ruth said "women take more of a strategic view in terms of managing funds. The male tendency can to be trade more, to turn over more".

She's absolutely right. Which is why the markets love male traders. Chances are, they'll do more trades, which stockbroking companies love, even if those trades are loss-making. But, what Ruth didn't say, is that men very rarely admit to loss-making trades. The ones that go wrong straight away are immediately allocated to the long-term strategic plan fund. It's always good to have a long-term plan.

Author Sheila O'Flanagan is a former fixed-income specialist