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: RockyBalboa who wrote (5242)	12/4/1999 12:54:00 PM
From: DanZ	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 10293

Regarding the S-3 filed by Gum Tech: The brother of an ex-director registered 47,000 shares of GUMM when the stock was below 10 in June and the shorts questioned why an "insider" would sell stock if it was going higher. That "insider" might not have even sold any stock, but if he did, he sold it at the lowest point in the last six months. Now a few people file a registration statement, which entitles them, but doesn't necessarily mean that they will sell stock, and the shorts claim that they must be selling because the stock is at the top. So which is it? Did an "insider" sell at the lowest price in the last six months because the stock wouldn't go any higher or are some investors exercising options because the stock is at a top? Your post sounds like negative spin du jour. Could it be that the people listed in the S-3 are registering their shares to get ready for a spike in the stock when the second clinical studies are released? At any rate, S-3 statements are filed by companies from small caps to the bluest of blue chips. They don't mean squat because the shares that they represent are already discounted by the market. Gum Tech has about 7.5 million shares outstanding. In reality, all of those shares are available for sale every day. The 550k shares being registered are no different; they are just in the spotlight because they have to be registered. It doesn't mean that the stock will be sold anytime soon. People buy and sell GUMM every day and one can't conclude anything about six people registering stock. Gum Tech has more options outstanding, and since all options have an expiration date, they will eventually be registered. I'm sure that we will hear more negative spin from the shorts with every S-3 filing, but the bottom line is shorts were wrong before about the implications of previous registration statements and they will be wrong about future ones. The best news about the S-3 is that Gum Tech will receive $3,181,000. If I were short, I'd be more concerned about how Gum Tech will use that money than a registration statement that everyone knew would eventually be filed. BTW, Cisco filed several registration statements in October, November, and December. Over this period, CSCO traded in a range of 65 to 97, closing at 95 9/16 yesterday. Nextel and E Trade also filed S-3 statements yesterday. Are those companies good shorts as well? You might want to come up with better criteria for picking short candidates. It's pretty obvious that you aren't going to make any money shorting a stock every time a company files an S-3. In fact, it looks like you would have lost money following that plan.