>>>msft was heavily shorted when it started, seemed to survive fine.<<<
But in an irnoic twist of fate, and in the marveling world of What If, what had msft not survived the short attack? Interesting thought, huh?
>>>Any real compnay would survive and cost the shortsellers a lot fo money if they produce.<<<
A well established company would likely bounce back, yes. But not all stocks which have become victimized by the shorting hordes (do you object to this term, by the way?) might not survive, especially if still a development phased company and especially if a hard-pressed short caused the company to get delisted from a major exchange. When the money dries up things can get real bad, don't you think? This is especially true if financing companies which normally do provide funding are having trouble themselves.
Theoretically, don't you think it's very possible for a company to have spent millions developing a solid and credible technology, and a kind of technology which grabbed lots of fanfare, but because everything rose so quickly it naturally got knocked down by the shorts to a point where an already downed horse continually gets kicked and kicked again, this after the panic selling has already taken its course.
I don't have the research, and I've asked if others know, but I bet there's plenty of examples such as I've described above. And what if one could have been Microsoft? You gotta admit, it's an ironic thought, ain't it?
>>>Companies don;t fail because their stock goes to zero. Their stock goes to zero because they fail.<<<
Not everyone can hit for a .300 or better average and some don't even make it to the show. I agree with that.
>>>organized shorting efforts may be able to temporarily effect the stock price, but never the companies' cance of success.<<<
That sorta depends on a fair up/fair down world, doesn't it? |
