Nowadays, whenever we decamp from Sharkey Towers for an extended period, our mail collection arrangements are left under the firm control of a pal who comes in each day, picks up a mountain of post and distributes it according to delivery date on our dining room table. He then feeds the cat, checks everything around the house is okay and disappears for 24 hours.

The arrangement means that when returning from holiday, we no longer need to spend ten minutes trying to open the front door by pushing aside a mound of what rapidly deteriorates into badly crumpled or ripped envelopes. Our cat seems pretty happy too.

Switching the computer on is a different matter, although this is done as soon as possible after returning home because it takes so long for incoming emails and their attachments to download.

Recently, I calculated that around 80 per cent of this mail was useless, although I was surprised at how much of it was urging an investment in this stock, suggesting participation in that investment course, or recommending I buy such-and-such research.

Type the words stock research' into Google and it takes 0.11 seconds to come up with 193 million links to websites offering the same, the starkest indication imaginable that there's a lot of it around, much of it of questionable quality.

A number of well-respected brokerages and investment banks know that stock research can be a lucrative business, but as Candice Browning, Merrill Lynch's head of research said recently, "much like the music and film industries before us, (our) research is in the throes of being Napsterised."

In other words, the Internet increasingly allows almost anyone to read expensive, well-produced research notes almost as soon as they're published.

Of course, whenever emails containing seemingly independent research drop into an investor's inbox, he has no idea whether a stock is being pumped' prior to being dumped. Indeed, as a matter of course, investors should routinely question what motives may lie behind any firm claiming that their stock research is absolutely invaluable.

Why? Apart from the usual caveat emptor consideration, the Internet's astonishing ability to distribute information means an investor would be crazy to do anything else.

It follows that the web's remarkable power and speed ensures the probability of having access to unique share-based research before anyone else has become almost negligible.

Analysts distributing their notes by email must start earning their corn by taking a different tack, because such is the speed with which share-related information is dispersed, investors must conclude that, assuming it's accurate, it must also be immediately priced into a share's value.

Does this mean stock analysts are in danger of becoming extinct? I think and hope not, although I imagine that instead of issuing specific recommendations, the best and most innovative will survive by sticking to releasing market, or sector, overviews, especially where they challenge conventional opinion.

Furthermore, I have a radical idea which will ensure that good qualitative research is not diluted as soon as it's published - why not post it to clients instead of emailing it?

Such an earth-shattering recommendation is, I know, considered outrageous among the higher echelons of some research houses, but while another item of post may make opening the door difficult when returning from holiday, if an investor is subscribing for research, at least he will know every Tom, Dick and Harry isn't accessing it online beforehand.