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.

Technology Stocks : The New QLogic (ANCR) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Grainne who wrote (25437)	1/8/2000 7:09:00 PM
From: Lhn5	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 29386

Bloomberg rana story about Piper analyst Ashock Kumar's reaction on Friday and that looked very positive.

To: Grainne who wrote (25437)	1/9/2000 2:34:00 AM
From: George Dawson	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 29386

"I just read over 500 ANCR posts at Yahoo, and am a little dazed (and confused). There is rampant debate over there about whether there will be negative news from Ancor management before the market opens on Monday, or just a brief statement reiterating that things are not going badly at all." Christine, I have found that the best way to avoid Yahoo induced bewilderment, is to stop reading it. I have been too charitable in characterizing many of those posts as being made by people who know absolutely nothing about the company or its products. There are clearly posters there who have wasted everyones' time. I never thought I would see the day that all of the posts of a specific poster on Yahoo were removed, but that day apparently happened. Every time someone floats an unsubstantiated rumor about Ancor (I have lost count of how many times that has happened) a whole new raft of anonymous posters shows up to start a new round of name calling. Chronic exposure to this absurd situation will be a disorienting experience. To me the most likely scenario was posted by Ocean Joe-except that I don't believe the selling and shorting was fueled as much by rumor as the technical aspects that he suggested. Those technical aspects in turn could have been driven profit taking and the need for some funds to reduce their position in the stock, due to gains. The Bloomberg news does not make any sense to me, because it was old news available through First Call. I am not aware of any bad news and I think the reason that none of the usual sources of misinformation has been able to make any up - is that they have no credibility and they failed to keep their powder dry for the right moment. I can't even guess about a statement from Ancor - only that if it is made, I hope it will be slightly more elaborate than saying that things are not going badly. I would agree with recent posters that we have a high degree of DD posted here on this thread, including excellent posts from the FC conference. Bad news is always possible, but I think of the various scenarios: 1. People with more clout than any of us would get it and leaked it. The alternate scenario from Herb G., that rather than "clout" shorts have impeccable DD has been thoroughly disproven. 2. Ancor has bad news, but their security is so tight only they know what the bad news is and we will find out on Monday. 3. Ancor has no news, the statements they have been making about being on track and the Sun deal are accurate. There will be no bad news. If you think about it from this perspective 1 & 2 are not compatible. If somebody had real bad news and talked to clients and sold we would know by now - we would not be speculating on a Saturday night. That leaves me with #3, the same conclusion I have been coming to for many months now. Of course this isn't a science and I may be wrong - but for discussion - that's my impression. I am open to the analysis of these and any other scenarios. All in the opinion of a guy with a day job, investing based on publicly available information. To all the great posters on Yahoo - no offense intended. In fact, I would like to see you posting over here - where the signal to noise is at least reasonable. George D.