Mr VALUESPEC, I will make this kind, or at least I hope you feel that this is not unjustly harsh.
I have been a lurker on this thread for a few weeks and must say that I have appreciated the posts that you have made, whether of a positive or negative nature, and I viewed with great scrutiny the response you have received, and could not understand it. I did not understand it before the past few days, but perhaps I understand it a bit better now.
"The fact that FTEL went under $ 3.00 is not surprising. If it stays there, that will be (even for me).
FTEL: $2.97b $ 3.06a (just went up)"
You even note that it had already gone up, so this is more of a recap, not a prediction, is it not? This is the quote from your previous post, that you just quoted. Now I have a problem with the way you re-worded it when you quoted yourself.
"[based on mm activities and shares]"
If you are going to quote yourself to prove a point you should do so verbatim, as it clearly is misleading with the way you did that, but that is not a major problem, I shall continue.
"On a technical basis, I gave a buy when FTEL was about $ 3.00."
Can you please direct me to the post where you made a technical recommendation of 3, or even close to that. If you refer to the first quote of yours, I do not consider that a buy recomendation. Also you have have stated that it was on a technical basis, yet I see that you did not state a basis for why you felt 3 was a good buy or that 3 was a buy.
I did see where you stated that you had begun trading this stock, when it was at 3.71, so I am genuinely confused as to why you purchased, and that is an assumption I make from your use of the term trading, above 3. I see this more as hindsight being 20-20 then any predictions you have made.
Could you help me understand these points?
This is not to attack, as others have done, but simply to have clarified what you actually said. |
