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 : InfoSpace (INSP): Where GNET went! -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: truth who wrote (16387)	1/21/2000 10:24:00 PM
From: levy	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 28311

When you look at your stock screen what do you see exactly......do you see but one big seller????.....what are you saying...the hedge fund can overwhelm price increase with selling because there is not as much volume buying pressure in GNET as compared to other internets because they have not had any major firm give it a buy rec??...the hedge fund knows this and thats why its picking on gnet and not the others??? or is in your opinion a planned attach to punish a company that didn't play by the rules??? I certainly would call myself no more than a lay person in these issues but I find this hard to believe...of the shares sold today what % can you honestly say were those of this one seller??? New Dog had a theory a bit ago which I think still holds.....in this price range there is still plenty profitable stock for people who have held this stock awhile to sell and make a pretty profit....from my lay position that seems most logical explanation for the lack of movement upward and would seem to be but a temporary situation soon to end with many news events that are likely to happen in the months to come and will spring this stock to new highs no matter your theory or mine. Personally if I was a hedge fund manager I'd be picking on a company that was losing money not GNET.

To: truth who wrote (16387)	1/21/2000 10:53:00 PM
From: Dr. Zax	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 28311

truth, You're explanations are quite logical. I have almost no question that this stock is manipulated. Others will. They find it hard to fathom that a single entity can throw around enough money to manipulate a stock with a 20 million float (And get away with it!!!). But the fact is, there may be a 20 million float but most of that is locked up in people's holding. This leaves a very small virtual float which is easily manipulated. the solutions: 1) figure out who is doing the manipulating and how they are doing it and profit from it. 2) ignore it, hold the stock long and do something useful for other people like planting trees or working a soup kitchen. when you look a year later, you see your GNET higher because it makes a profit and has potential. As for how to stop the crazy manipulation. Wait for the hedge fund to move on to another stock... not much else to say. If the stock becomes too obvious, more hedge funds will join in, they will take different approaches and then GNET will no longer be as profitable for them. Maybe the solution is to invite more hedge funds, then it will be really bad for a shorter period of time. Also remember that today was options expiry. This too has a large effect on several stock like GNET and AOL. Dr. Zax

To: truth who wrote (16387)	1/22/2000 2:24:00 AM
From: jon zachary	Respond to of 28311

truth, .....so true. jZ

To: truth who wrote (16387)	1/22/2000 10:59:00 AM
From: Hawkmoon	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 28311

Truth, I agree with your analysis, but I assume you are only guessing as whether or not it is a "large" hedge fund, or instead a couple of professional short-sellers/traders out there colluding in their trading strategies. In the end, there is only one way to deal with such a situation and that is to buy and hold... and if you wish to be so aggressive, actually take delivery of stock certificates. (But that is such a hassle). Eventually the shortage of stock will drive the price higher, either from outright demand, or from a short squeeze. Regards, Ron