Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

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 : The Naked Truth - Big Kahuna a Myth -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: accountclosed who wrote (47570)	6/16/1999 4:10:00 PM
From: Ilaine	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 86076

The boyz are just funning with each other, IMO. Gallows humor.

To: accountclosed who wrote (47570)	6/16/1999 4:19:00 PM
From: Lizzie Tudor	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 86076

I support your view, imo an after the fact conspiracy theory call (almost always where someone has lost money on a position) is a cowardly thing to do. There are cases where books are cooked and companies that do this kind of thing, cpq is a great example and everybody knows they do it and trying to win with cpq stock is almost impossible because you never know what kind of shenanigans they are going to pull to reel in there numbers... and just when you think it is safe to go back into the pool... they implode (which eventually happens to all book-cookers). So I'm not saying books aren't cooked, but if you suspect upwards bias in somebodys numbers up front then you should just call it beforehand and avoid playing the short side where you could get burned I guess. I suppose the same rationale applies to these fed numbers. edit - whoops posted this final part to the wrong person