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.

Biotech / Medical : Biotech vs. Shorts -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Biomaven who wrote (275)	11/18/1999 5:59:00 PM
From: Gordon James	Respond to of 427

Peter, Great list, thanks. CLTR sure has a whopping percentage short! Would this data be as of the latest monthly short interest reports? Cheers, Gordon

To: Biomaven who wrote (275)	11/18/1999 9:22:00 PM
From: WTDEC	Respond to of 427

Nice list Peter. Thanks. W

To: Biomaven who wrote (275)	11/19/1999 1:39:00 AM
From: Doc Bones	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 427

Peter, I agree with you completely on the primary importance of shorting as a percentage of market cap. The days-to-cover data is important, but secondary. Float has a role too. The major academic study someone posted (That shorted stocks don't do well on average) used market cap. The big emphasis on days-to-cover, IMO, betrays the common short mentality of a quick attack. Usually shorts are less interested in finding over-valued, over-hyped stocks that will go down in the long run, than in launching an attack against a vulnerable stock, driving it down with rumors and fast selling, making a quick profit. Certainly many of their targets are overpriced, and some are outright frauds. But in biotech we've seen them attack many good companies that were vulnerable from some mistake or bad publicity, and drive them down with false rumors and fear-mongering. You see companies that offer excellent value because their stock has dropped, picked on for just that reason. Mo-mo in action. Shorts, like any predator, can serve a good purpose in the ecology. But not with lies and rumors attacking good companies that have shown some weakness, which is often a PR or "political" failing, rather than anything fundamental. And could someone tell the shorts that obnoxiousness is not an art form. Thanks for the great data. With the enemy in clearer view, might the hunted turn and become the hunter? Bill