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 : Anthony @ Equity Investigations, Dear Anthony, -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Anthony@Pacific who wrote (51859)	2/17/2000 12:34:00 PM
From: chris	Respond to of 122087

Is SCON not on your radar screen of stocks to short or are you sitting on the sidelines on this one?

To: Anthony@Pacific who wrote (51859)	2/17/2000 1:46:00 PM
From: Kirk ©	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 122087

You still long BOWG? eh haw! On a nice run now!

To: Anthony@Pacific who wrote (51859)	2/17/2000 3:36:00 PM
From: Whitmore G.	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 122087

Anthony my hat is off to you. I am not a shorter by nature but I have to respect a guy that can make the sometimes fine distinction between a typical pump and dump hyped stock and one that actually has the legs to walk the walk and withstand the talk. SCON is the real deal girls and boys. It is making superconducting filters that are essential to the future of 3G wireless. It along with ISCO are the future of wireless technology. Don't get caught on the wrong side of this one! You will surely regret it! It may pull back a few points when the volume drops. If you are short take your profits then because it will take off again! God will be the only one who can help you then. Well maybe him and Mr. Greenshades!

To: Anthony@Pacific who wrote (51859)	2/17/2000 11:06:00 PM
From: carolina	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 122087

SCON... as I understand it, you have not called(officially) a short on this stock. However from your messages #51820 and 51821 it was apparent to me that you believed SCON was being pumped and dumped by Markham. Also, from the length of your responses to his article it was also apparent that you neither took his article or the stocks he chose seriously. Is this a correct asumption? If not why such a lengthy reply?