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.

Strategies & Market Trends : Anthony @ Equity Investigations, Dear Anthony, -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Jesse Livermore who wrote (40662)	7/9/1999 10:01:00 AM
From: Jesse Livermore	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 122087

Haup: Lower the stop to $29 and close with at least a 1/2 point less the vig. The opening was very soft. Another Edit: Lower the stop to $28 1/2 guaranteeing a profitable day trade.

To: Jesse Livermore who wrote (40662)	7/9/1999 1:07:00 PM
From: jhnewman	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 122087

Jesse: good call last night on HAUP... Thanks for your thoughts on SNMM. I've been in since 4 and plan to stay there. I think in the long run SNMM may do better than UBET, JMO. SNMM is about to post earnings of at least .06/share...for Q499...which will give them FY99 earnings of .11/share = the same as EBAY. And, as they concentrate on signing up more and more licensees, and concentrate on building their market share in Asia and Europe, they'll do much better than that in FY2000. Some watered down form of the Kyl bill will probably pass by the end of this year. Some of that "cloud" is already priced into the stock. And the Justice Department has already said that Kyl is unenforceable. As for the loopholes in Kyl, horseracing and lotteries, SNMM is building a strong presence there. If Kyl passes, I think it will have a short-term affect on the stock, but that SNMM's growing revenue and earnings numbers will have a more permanent affect. Wouldn't it be illegal then for anyone in the U.S. to bet over the Internet on casino games, sports book, etc.? Technically yes. But to me it's similar to Prohibition...when it was illegal to drink a beer. Prohibition was ineffective because it was a bad law, and I think the same will be true of Kyl...if it passes. And the government couldn't be more hypocritical. It pushes gambling in the form of lotteries harder than any Las Vegas casino. As you know, more sensible countries have opted for regulation of Internet gambling rather than trying to prohibit it. (Our Puritanism showing through.) And if Kyl does pass...once it proves itself ineffective...I think the U.S. will move to regulation as well. Anyway, thanks again for your thoughts. Best of luck, Newman.