SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Pastimes : Business Wire Falls for April Fools Prank, Sues FBNers
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  
To: JustJohn who wrote (995)5/1/1999 8:54:00 AM
From: Don Pueblo  Read Replies (1) of 3795
 
Heh, heh. I like this, John. You have engaged several people with your hypothesis. Slick.

Let's look at several hypothetical scenarios.

A criminal claims to have been duped by the phony April Fool's gag into selling some stock and thereby somehow losing a potential gain when the stock came back up. He did not know the gag was a gag, therefore the gag is responsible for his "loss". I got that part right?

He would be better off claiming that there was some actual substance to what he was intending to purchase. For example, he could claim that he was at a garage sale and saw a copy of Superman #1 for ten bucks. He went home, sold his stock, and came back, and the owner of the comic book had changed his mind and decided not to sell. Therefore, the owner of the comic book would be responsible for any loss incurred when the criminal's stock went back up without him.

That would work better, probably, since there would be a real comic book in the story.
Report TOU ViolationShare This Post
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  

HomeMailHotSubjectMarksPeopleMarksKeepersSettings
Terms Of UseContact UsCopyright/IP PolicyPrivacy PolicyAbout UsFAQAdvertise on SI
© 2025 Knight Sac Media.  Data provided by Twelve Data, Alpha Vantage, and CityFALCON News