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 : Stock Watcher's Thread / Pix of the Week (POW) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: CIMA who wrote (21977)	12/16/1999 5:56:00 PM
From: Boddington	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 52051

Patagonia's entire history is *ZERO* success, often with the price running before the hyping and the price plummeting immediately afterwards, as detailed in that report. If anyone should be under FBI/RCMP investigation it should be Patagonia, the stocks they hype, and their accomplices such as yourself. Nothing but de-listings, failures, and worse. What is "innacurate" in the Truthseeker report? The only inaccuracies are the stock prices, they're all much much lower now than when originally reported. So, Patagonia's record is actually much much worse than it seems in that report. If they are so innocent in the MDHM/NPEC "debacle", then why were they at the AGM recently hyping merrily along? Why not issue a retraction or an apology? Why hype stocks run by people who have a public record of stock fraud? Why accept payment in stock, which is a clear conflict of interest and serious violation of SEC regulations? What about the fact that every single one of their picks are complete failures, some getting de-listed only days after a STRONG BUY? You spam for them every time they release, both on SI and other boards with different aliases, without mentioning the fact that *ALL* their picks go straight down, which you are no-doubt well aware of. Follow garbage stocks all you want, but don't spam them here. Or anywhere. You're correct in saying that there are two sides to the story. The truth and the lies. This is the truth. You are the lowest of the low.