SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Biotech / Medical : Pluvia vs. Westergaard

 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  
To: Scrapps who wrote (428)8/28/1997 5:07:00 AM
From: Pluvia   of 1267
 
<<<I'm confused here. What does short selling have to do with it, if Steve thought the thing was a dud and he shorted it...he was simply putting his money where his mouth was!>>>

Scrapps,

I think your point is a critical concept in the issue of our freedom of speech, here on SI and other stock boards. Thank god I didn't short the stock while expressing bearish opinions and presenting bearish facts about the company. Where would I be now if I did?

It seems you ARE allowed to get away with posting warm fuzzy feelings and outright hype -- and maintaining a long position without the threat of a Westergaard suggesting you are a stock manipulating fraud and violating your privacy by offering a reward for information about you.

Maybe if Abelson from Barrons hired Westergaard to promote him, instead of Premier Lasers, Westergaard would start an internet sweep arm of his WIBN that would offer $5,000 rewards for persons posting positive hype intended to drive up the prices of stock.

It would seem that you have to be fair to both sides of the argument in this issue. Flipping the coin on Westergaard's position, IMO, really shows just how outrageous his actions are.

My question is, if someone did just the opposite of what Westergaard is doing, as I have suggested in theory, would a bounty have been issued for the likes of Westergaard, for publishing paid promotion packaged in what appears to be objective analysis?

It seems Westergaard, in the position of a promoter, paid to support the long positions of his client companies, is the definition of a hypocrite (as others have suggested) by going after what he thinks are "Shorts" -- persons with a financial interest in supporting the short argument of a company.

Another thing I find rather appalling -- Westergaard tries to pass himself off as a professional investment research firm, with 40 some years of experience he brags.

Heck if he were good at research <I mean that is the business he claims to be in right?>, he would have known he was attacking the wrong person when he came after me. My history can be researched on the stockboards. I guess that makes it easier to understand why his track record for stocks highlighted as "Ideas of the Week" is what it is.

Steve
Report TOU ViolationShare This Post
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext