Dweeb, you need to read a bit more widely. You don't seem to understand that when people write things [or say them] they say more about themselves than the person they are talking about. That's because it is their world-view which is doing the talking based on their [always limited] perceptions.
You call me a selfish moron, hope the company sues me, scum, should be hammered by thugs in prison and similar stuff.
Maybe you'll feel really stupid if you read a bit more and don't just get your opinions from the WSJ or other biased interpreters.
Then you seem to think it MUST be a scam. In case you can't figure it out, scams don't work very well done in wide open public view with everyone watching, law enforcement etc. Not only that, the suggested date was several weeks away so that people would all have time to adjust their seat belts and invest according to their world-view of Globalstar, margin levels, short levels etc, etc. As you also probably have now figured out, any shorts could have covered multimillions of shares in the past few days if they are concerned about Globalstar shareholders reducing the leveraged float. So nobody need be caught short.
If you are still bamboozled, perhaps you should adjust your premise, which seems to be that other people are necessarily greedy scumbag crooks. You probably think there must be SOME angle to it that will line my pocket.
There is.
If the share price goes up and stays up due to more closely held stock, that enables Globalstar to raise funds on better terms than would otherwise be the case. Shareholders would therefore suffer less dilution. I'm a shareholder. Therefore, I'd benefit financially by not having to sell shares [via Globalstar] to new shareholders at cheaper prices than would otherwise be the case.
Get it?
Even if it doesn't have any effect, it is fun to figure things out, see how things work and invest accordingly. The SEC is to prevent criminal acts, not to stop people discussing investment ideas, persuading others that they are a good idea and acting accordingly. A free and fair market is the intent of the SEC.
I considered deleting your posts, but decided against it because serious people [the WSJ and some guy from the SEC and some Californian law enforcement agency] seem to seriously think there is something criminal going on. Obstruction of justice and destroying evidence can even get a President of the USA into trouble [not saying he did that but some people claimed he did] so some dumb Kiwi who doesn't know what 'investor' means would not be wise to destroy evidence or obstruct justice.
But, a couple of days ago, Silicon Investor DID delete some posts and I moaned about it. I can't recall what the posts said, but they were not offensive [like yours]. Silicon Investor is therefore perhaps liable to be prosecuted for obstruction of justice and destroying evidence. They ought to put those posts back if they have them in their trash can. They might be material evidence. I suppose if they had no intention of destroying evidence, they'd be okay, but they should not destroy any more evidence or obstruct justice.
It might pay them not to delete posts here until the SEC gives them the 'all-clear'.
I'm a long and I have fallen for the scheme but I don't see how I'm going to be hurt by moving my shares to a cash account. Maybe you could save me from this evil plot which I picked up by reading what others wrote. It wasn't my idea, I just did what the WSJ did and propagated the idea and suggested a date, well in advance.
Apart from Anthony@Hey.click.on.me, you and a few others, everybody seems to think it a good idea. Including many professionals who PM me privately. Lawyers seem to be unanimous that it's legal. Better adjust your thinking.
Mqurice |
