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 : p-com (pcms) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: charlie who wrote (1282)	1/14/2000 6:33:00 PM
From: lazarre	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1461

Charlie, I really can't argue with your point of view, here. Could be as exactly as you say. Management did not have the gravitas nor credibility ( the sins of the past gone unforgiven even in the face of a new zeitgeist ). I'm more interested in what's working now. At the risk of repeating myself, we clearly have a turn-a-round situation that could've have been dead in the water before it even started, without this influx of dough. I believe the dilution won't matter as much as it "might" now in 6months to a year. Having bought in @9 I won't have heartburn if I'm @ 40 when I might have been @ 45 without this sale of stock. IMO. L

To: charlie who wrote (1282)	1/19/2000 4:47:00 PM
From: Steve Lee	Respond to of 1461

This ain't right: "they could just short sell enough to offset their position, and then pocket the 40million difference" You must know there are only so many buyers at the bid, and after that only so many at the next bid price down. So by the time they had sold all those short stocks, they would be selling at a significantly lower price. This is why the stock was sold at a discount rather than just issuing more shares which would have gone on the open market straight away. The expectation must be that by the time these stocks are sold, there will be enough additional good news to offset the selling pressure.