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.

Non-Tech : Bill Wexler's Dog Pound -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Eddy Blinker who wrote (7205)	4/4/2000 11:25:00 AM
From: Peter V	Respond to of 10293

The core of your question Ed goes to whether every trader has to disclose his motivation for each trade, long or short. The answer to that is no, it is neither necessary or practical to do so. You should make investment decisions based on what you think a company's prospects are, not the amount of short or long interest there is in the stock.

To: Eddy Blinker who wrote (7205)	4/5/2000 1:38:00 AM
From: Mike M	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 10293

Eddie, Hank's suggestion that somehow GUMM's roundtrip from 12 to 36 and back closes the issue is absurd. That the short element knows what they have accomplished is obvious. Longs have long known that the short position was prevalent and dangerous. Those who know and believe in the company and invest prudently have a distinct advantage, however, over the shorts who are willing to gamble that they can effect the short term outcome of the stock before investment considerations become compelling. I have absolutely no problem with shorts or longs being able to take their positions on either side of the stock. I have done so myself on occasion as a hedge. What I see as the problem is the willingness of those same shorts to vilify honest people and intentionally distort information to manipulate the stock movement. It is one thing to suggest that a company's stock price has gotten ahead of the fundamentals yet another to openly impugn or otherwise imply fraudulent behavior simply because one disagrees philosophically with the company or its product or worse yet because they have sold short. This issue is a double edged sword in that defense of the company suggests "touting" just as quickly as the negative "shilling".... As is always the case, the fundamentals, product and execution, will eventually win out and the struggle between shorts and longs merely creates excessive volatility. In short Hank's self assuredness is temporary if not shortlived. Nothing more.