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 : DAYTRADING Fundamentals -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: OZ who wrote (3188)	8/22/1999 1:23:00 PM
From: -	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 18137

Looks to me like Bjorkman has a good point. If you follow the logic in his letter, it holds up. The thing about this reporter Gretchen is, she is a fraudulent! She has established a pattern of taking one or two complete falsehoods, and weaving her anti-daytrading articles around them. She does appear to have a malicious agenda as Joe claims; probably because daytraders are an easy target - being unpopular thanks to these sort of stories - and she gets an easy ride due to that sentiment, by writing titillating articles full of intrigue. I'll bet she used to write novels. Sure, Tokyo Joe is a slimeball, so he's an easy target. Who's going to defend him? Pristine and MB Trading, fine firms, probably looked like easy targets, to Gretchen too because they are "daytraders". Who's next? She doesn't seem to be encumbered by the need to research key "facts". As a NY Times subscriber, I take offense to that - I've come to respect their journalistic integrity. This is definitely a contra-example. The world of trading is complex enough, that this is probably an easy topic to slip by their radar screen. But, they should be ashamed of themselves for publishing pseudo-sophisticated garbage, that wouldn't be used by most local papers! I would predict Gretchen is going to end up getting the NY Times into some serious hot water (if she hasn't already). They obviously aren't checking the "facts" in her articles, and someone is going to sue her - and win. You can't just go around making things up that aren't true, publish it in the NY Times as a major expose', and get away with it repeatedly. -Steve