Tim: What I got out of Dominic's post was reassurance that the founders behind COPY have an impressive track record. In light of the continuous bombardment from you and other short sellers on their integrity and credibility I think it is important for investors, or prospective investors to know as much as possible about the founder's backgrounds. Frankly, I was favorable impressed with their previous accomplishments. If I had only read (and believed) your posts I would have expected to see criminal records and the like.
Perhaps COPY's technology will succeed in revolutionizing certain industries, perhaps it will never be perfected to the point where they'll become a household name, but, it seems to me that the founder's and the Company are, as Dominic asserts, legitimately trying to succeed in bringing revolutionary technology to market. Seeing that they have done this once before suggests that their chances of success are significantly better than the naysayers pretend they are here on SI.
I've grown accustomed to the rhetoric short sellers post in these forums and expect them to be an unfortunate part of investing in development stage companies, such as, COPY. However, I am far from agreeing that it is ethical to post outright lies and innuendo in an attempt to profit by screaming "SCAM" time after time in an effort to frighten shareholders out of their positions in a stock. The SEC will ultimately have to develop a method of quickly investigating situations where these claims are made and once determined, MAKE PUBLIC the outcome of their investigation. Afterall, it is easy to determine a scam from an honest development stage company. If the regulatory agencies fail to perform this badly needed function then our public markets may lose there attractiveness to pioneering entreprenuers and companies as more companies are damaged by these "marauders".
I believe it amounts to financial terrorism when lies and innuendo are spread about a company in an attempt to profit from shorting shares in the victim/company. I've seen it happen to Diana Corp (DNAK), Solv-Ex (SOLVQ), the "Cold Ease" company, Osicom (FIBR) and of course, COPY. Thus far the regulators have not taken any action even in cases where illegalities were discovered, documented, and reported. I am hopeful that efforts to rectify this pattern of "looking the other way" by NASD and the SEC will yield results in the very near future.
Dave |
