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.

Non-Tech : Bill Wexler's Dog Pound -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Mama Bear who wrote (2089)	7/13/1999 10:22:00 PM
From: Mike M	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 10293

Mike, I wonder if the squeeze in GUMM will be like that of the one in CUST you warned everyone about in late May when the stock was at 90. Whoa Mom....what is a nice bear like you doing in a dog pound? I know you a woman of distinction and not tending to careless accusation, but I really don't remember warning of any squeezes in late May....I only remember talking of the squeeze that got the stock to 90.... If you have some link that will serve to incriminate, then I will respond but I think I am on record on the CUST thread of admitting that my only reason for being in that stock was because the insiders were buying in huge volume and then adding because the momentum was so favorable.... I never pretended to know CUST like I know GUMM...nor do I still own CUST as I have mentioned on the CUST thread....specifically to you. Mom, it just isn't right, you and I airing our dirty laundry in front of these ruffians at the dog pound. I remember everything you taught me including that "trees don't grow up to the sky".... You know I can't stay mad at you Mom....but, I don't think GUMM and CUST are very similar and don't really understand your thinking that they are....

To: Mama Bear who wrote (2089)	7/13/1999 11:32:00 PM
From: DanZ	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 10293

Barb, The short interest in GUMM has averaged about 850,000 shares since the stock peaked at 16 1/2 in August 1997. I wasn't involved with GumTech back then but from the history that I have gathered from various sources, many short sellers bet that the company would go out of business and didn't cover when the stock got as low as 4 1/4 in January 1998. During the period from August 97 to January 98, the short interest increased each month from 839,811 shares in Aug 97 to 936,359 shares in Jan 98. In February 98, a major shareholder pressured the Board of Directors to replace the CEO, President, CFO, and several Directors. Once the new management team was in place, they changed the company's strategic direction from one of building their own brand name (which failed) to one of contract manufacturing. The new strategy has paid off as one can see by reviewing the company's year to year and quarter to quarter sales growth. Despite having new management, a new strategic plan, and improving fundamentals, the short interest in GUMM has remained relatively constant over the past 18 months, averaging about 850,000 shares. During this period, the stock based in the 4 area for about six months, moved up and found support near 6 for a few months, and finally based near 9 1/2 between Feb 99 and July 99 before breaking out of a tight trading range over the past few weeks. The point of this data is that many short sellers entered their position before the management change that turned the company around. Many expected GumTech to fold, but instead, the company is building momentum on the heels of manufacturing agreements with Breath Asure, Heritage Consumer Products, Ranir, and Pharmagreen, to name a few. Then came Zicam and the prospect for nicotine gum, and the shorts are in trouble, IMO. I know nothing about CUST but I seriously doubt if their story is remotely similar to GUMM. Even though highly shorted stocks may tend to underperform over time, there are always some that outperform. I have been around the market long enough to know that you can be right 99% of the time and still lose money if the amount you lose 1% of the time is so great, that you wipe out the gains on the 99% that were winners. I don't have a bit of malice in me and sincerely hope that those who are short GUMM keep a reasonable stop loss. I have a price in mind where I will bail on my long position as well.