Druss:
"sommovigo--If you had read A@P's thread, or Auric's, or Mr. Pink's you would discover they take a great deal of pleasure in uncovering market manipulators, scams, and touts. There are other bugs in the market than simply other investors. When you are one of Mr. Pink's 'Made Men' [People who have exposed a scam.] then you can throw your manipulation charges around and be listened to.
Druss"
First of all, I did not CHARGE or ACCUSE Auric of anything in my statements - I did ask questions.
Auric has on other occasions stated that he would "decimate some POS" referring DIRECTLY to a stock - DIRECTLY
My question, therefore, remains - if Auric is using short-selling as a tactic to "decimate some POS" stock, is that considered to be an act of attempted price manipulation vis-a-vis the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, Section 9?
Frankly, I do not care one tittle whether Mr Pink, Elgindy, or Auric have "exposed" anything - short-selling is ONE activity, belonging to an investment strategy. Exposing fraud is ANOTHER acitivity - when you relate the two, when you use short-selling as a means to "decimate some POS" company that you are in the throes of "exposing" - that SEEMS to be a deliberate attempt to manipulate the price of an issue for TACTICAL PURPOSES.
DO NOT CONFUSE the action of exposing frauds and short-selling. When a short-seller deems to "crush a bug" or "decimate some POS" stock by short-selling, OR if he deems to "crush a bug" or "decimate some POS" stock by exposing it's fraudulent activity AND THEN shorts the issue, I have reason to suspect that the INTENT behind the ACTION was a TACTICAL MARKET MANIPULATION - which would seem to clearly fall under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, Section 9.
No matter how you slice it, it doesn't seem to me to look very promising for Auric... expecially because he also SEEMS to be violating various other NASD and SEC rules by posting anonymously to public message boards when he is a NASD registered broker working for an SEC licensed brokerage.
It really seems to me like your knight in shining armor is not as shining as you thought (or hoped) he was. You cannot "expose" frauds convincingly when you are not squeeky clean yourself. As far as I can tell, it SEEMS to me that Auric MAY BE a slimy lawbreaker himself. |
