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.

Biotech / Medical : CYBR CyberCare the new look of healthcare -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Kevin Podsiadlik who wrote (2280)	6/20/2000 12:28:00 AM
From: sommovigo	Respond to of 3392

Kevin - could be you are correct.

To: Kevin Podsiadlik who wrote (2280)	6/20/2000 1:22:00 AM
From: sommovigo	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 3392

Kevin - reading your post again I see you have created data again to support an argument. My point was that, whoever you think is currently running the downward manipulation of CYBR, must, by your logic, have been responsible for the upward manipulation as well. You asserted it yourself, that no criminal would ever do one side of the manip without doing the other. And I just wanted to see your evidence of that in this case. I do not think that anyone is presently "running the downward manipulation of CYBR" - I do suspect strongly that on February 23rd, at the open of trading, a concerted and synchronized "short-attack" on CYBR's stock sent it plummeting and then continued short pressure was put to it through to the 3's. Now I have no beef with short-selling as a legitimate investment technique - I do have a problem if there was organization and synchronization from short-sellers, as that implies collusion to manipulate - the same kind of manipulation that would be a momentum "push" of organized buyers. Price manipulation is price manipulation, regadless of the direction you may be pushing the price. While pure "hypers" seem to try and push the price up to enhance a long position, true "bashers" seem to push the price down to enhance a short position. My point about the potential for a criminal or group of criminals running a P&D, on the other hand, was simply to demonstrate to Barb that although the criminals recently busted by the SEC were "longs" - it would seem unreasonable to think that they wouldn't have also gone short if the opportunity presented itself. The people "inside" the company that were in cahoots would easily have sold off as the criminals "dumped" and then shorted - if shorting were available as an option. If the company is a shell that has no other prupose than to move a stock price around, your assertion that "the manipulator runs the risk that the company, valuing their reputation more highly than a short-term market cap increase, will issue a flat denial of whatever rumor he is trying to spread before he can even get out of his long position, thus burning him to a crisp" is only a variable - a possibility, but not a foregone conclusion. There would be no burning to a crisp if the inside guys were 'in on it' - the insiders would simply sell along with the manipulators, and the manipulators (and perhaps even the insiders) could be free to short a shortable security all the way down to wherever. Now: This had nothing to do with Auric, Herb, Evans, Floyd, Morelock, A@P, or any of the other shorts or short-affiliates - it was simply a demonstration of logic and an illustration of Barb's incomplete picture. That was the sole reason for that post - to describe a reasonable assumption for a criminal scam, and that scam includes both manipulators and people inside companies - such as those who were recently busted by the SEC and FBI. While the "vast majority of manipulations are done with the company's blessing" (as you put it), that is not a clear cut 100% case, and stocks can be manipulated without the blessing of the company. A watershed, synchronized short-attack model could be very effective at manipulating a stock downward - Wash out the stops, wash out the margins, and cause general panic by instituting an army of bashers bringing up irrelevant and disinformative "false facts" - demoralize the longs to help the short position. Since the majority of shareholders (aside from insiders) were retail investors with margin shares and not institutions with cash shares, the short sale on CYBR seemed to be easy pickings. But the first 20 minutes of trading from February 23rd seems to tell a story... fast and furious selling with no bad news out. 12 point degeneration in 20 minutes, and not a single bad report or press article released to give that watershed selling any substance other than alot of people shorting the shares coincidentally. That was my first alert that something was amiss, and the possibility that CYBR was manipulated by an outside force became my suspicion.