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.
Non-Tech : Bill Wexler's Dog Pound
REFR 1.560-2.5%Nov 7 9:30 AM EST

 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  
To: Bill Wexler who wrote (1886)7/11/1999 1:48:00 PM
From: Mike M  Read Replies (1) of 10293
 
Wrong. I shorted yahoo based strictly on overvaluation. Yahoo was not a fraudulent stock promotion scheme.GUMM is.

Sure it is. I forgot that your three minute due diligence figured all that out.

I'll say it again. You are a complete fool.

To be so deemed by someone the likes of you is no shame. From everything I have seen of you name calling is your first and last resort when you have nothing of value to say. And, Wexler you have nothing of value to say.


<<By the way the market cap is 92M....>>

False. The most recent round of dilutive financing pushes the real market cap (on a fully diluted basis) closer to $100,000,000.

You don't even understand the most recent financing, do you, Bill? Perhaps you would have needed another minute of due diligence

<<Good job, Bill. The last 12 months is actually $3.5M....Didn't miss it by much. I guess this makes you a historian.>>

No, I simply made an error in my post. GUMM lost roughly $12,000,000 over the past 2 fiscal years. TTM loss was roughly $3.5 million. Any way you cut it, it sucks.

Where do you come up with these pithy remarks. What exactly "sucks" Bill? Besides your understanding of the company or what is unfolding?

<<Tell me, though, if we are using your kind of numbers, then why are we willing to pay 676M(OOPS, we may have paid more than that-that's just what it is worth now) for a company which lost over $30M(CPU)? >>

I'll say it again. You are a complete fool.

That name calling doesn't become you. unfortunately, it is a part of you....Actually, It is you. You demonstrate the "takes one to know one"...saying.

<<I thought the logic was more on what the company's potential was, not how it did last year. >>

I can't tell you how many times I've heard the "don't look in the rear-view mirror' spiel from the scam stock shills. GUMM's "potential" is based on the fraudulent promotion of a quack remedy. Period. I have no doubt that the stock is rigged and it may be squeezed further, I also have no doubt that it will trade significantly lower than its current price.

I guess this means you want to roar with a sound and fury that signifies nothing but will take neither of the bets. Not even the one you proposed. You are hot air, Bill. You offer nothing of value. Anyone who pays attention to your "shill" deserves what he gets.
Short away.
Report TOU ViolationShare This Post
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext