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 : Globalstar Memorial Day Massacre -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Maurice Winn who wrote (261)	5/28/2000 7:19:00 AM
From: Mama Bear	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 543

Maurice, I believe that TJ got in trouble for acting against his recs, i.e. selling into the buying he created when he said buy, and vice versa. Published newsletters have been making recs to subscribers for years with the full protection of the First Amendment. It is not the action of saying 'buy' that is wrong, it is the action of selling against that. WRT your situation here I'm not sure I would be so sanguine as you. The fact that the SEC has not taken action against you in such a short period is meaningless. The action against Joe took months from the time the evidence against him was presented to the SEC. The thing that I see that may have you in hot water is choosing the specific date. No, promoting the idea that folks should put their stock in a cash account is not anything less than protected speech, but you seem to miss the point that doing this in the manner you have chosen could be construed as collusion. I admit that I'm not a lawyer, and I've found this entire exercise amusing. I know you say that folks have pm'd you claiming to be lawyers and told you that this is ok. Of course one can be anything on the Internet. Perhaps it will be a moot point if no price change occurs, or if you maintain any position that you hold as you've claimed you will. I think the result will be a movement of the short position to offshore brokers who require no borrow to initiate a short position, but again, that's just my speculation. Regards, Barb

To: Maurice Winn who wrote (261)	5/28/2000 6:47:00 PM
From: rrufff	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 543

I'd like to weigh in and congratulate you on your most interesting thread and discussion. It really would be a stretch to claim that you are manipulating in contravention of the SEC acts and regulations thereunder. I've written often about the action of some of the well-known short touts. There are associates who render exposes and supposed press releases. Often times these are released shortly before a critical event or near the end of a trading day. When they are questioned, they often state that they have no position. What they don't realize is that when they are working with others, directly or indirectly, with or without compensation sharing, who take positions before the publication, then the issue no longer is protected speech, but rather gets into the area of manipulative conduct. Your activity is in no way comparable to what these shorts may do or try to do. Often times, they have their position established and their lemmings get stuck in the "creation of volume" which follows the release. All in all, this is a very interesting and evolving area of securities law. You have clearly stated your intent and that you are not profiting in any unfair way. The WSJ article was very poorly written at best. Again, good luck with your investment and your thread.