Dizzy,
> Thought you might be interested in this...
> Update on the INVT defamation case:
Interesting! thanks.
Interesting in several ways -- for instance, that you passed along the fact of the dismissal, which is public information, but without comment. Maybe INVT agreed to dismiss as long as the defendants didn't comment on the dismissal. But the case looks like it never got off the ground -- no surprise, but good to know.
I don't doubt that there are people who deliberately try to sink a stock price by working in coordination with others to spread false info -- and that's illegal. But sometimes that fact is used to try to intimidate people -- like me -- who act individually just by expressing their opinion, which is LEGAL. You know, First Amendment, market place of ideas, like that.
INVT has blamed its stock price sink on negative online comments, and on MMaker manipulations -- and both explanations don't wash. If a company has something going on, it'll do well ultimately. If it doesn't, it won't.
As time goes on, INVT looks like it fits into the "doesn't, and won't" category. I didn't invest much into INVT, so I have little to lose, but I still feel like a sucker and one who coulda seen the signs if I had looked for them. Or to quote the pickpocket charactder in Casablanca "vultures! vultures everywhere!"
- Charles |
