Jimbo: Not that it matters anymore, but you came on the thread yelling buy LPGLY, as it then was, when it was $39, intraday. When I asked you was it wise to buy the stock given that it had risen $10 in one day, from a $29 close, and I knew nothing about it, you answered yes, that you had bought it that day at $35. This came after a few days when you were recommending it as a buy on its fundamentals, including its book value - not as a a trading stock. Everything else you say is revisionism.
By trading LPGL I have almost fully corrected my mistake in paying too much for it. Now that I know a lot more about it, I believe it is a buy, preferably under $23. I think it needs to sort out questions about its liquidity in the LSE and NASDAQ.
This exchange between you and me started when I commented on Friday that if anybody is made to feel worse about their losses in COMPAQ when you rub salt in the wounds by suggesting that you have a hot hand, and stocks are routinely increasing 100% on a daily and weekly basis, while money in COMPAQ is dead money, they should remember that two stocks you have recommended in the last two weeks, have lost 25% and 35% in a matter of a day two and faster than COMPAQ has lost money.
I can now add that when you recommend a buy, what you really mean is buy, sell, buy, sell, buy, sell, in a few days. It seems butt-kicking not only depends on the greater fool theory, but also the agility of a can-can dancer. |
