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 : Auric Goldfinger's Short List -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Don Pueblo who wrote (5745)	8/17/2000 3:20:55 PM
From: sommovigo	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 19428

Tastes like Chicken, The argument you raise is on another subject for another discussion at another time. Auric is a registered broker. That may be very bad for him because of what he has done AND what he has failed to do. You notice that he is not here defending himself? He's relying on lemmings like you to do it for him? Where is Auric? Where is his attorney? "The truth is an absolute defense" - I like that, even though it was his attorney that used it to defend him, I like it. And so it is. The truth is an aboslute defense, and what I am telling you is the truth. You want to beat me up about my trades, so be it. It's off the subject and immaterial to what i am attempting to communicate to you. Auric has flapped around with Floyd and others like a caped-crusader saving the world from the criminals and scum of the investing world, never once advising anyone that he is a registered broker working for an SEC registered dealer, nor had he advised anyone of potential conflicts of interest he may have as a result of that professional status. Meanwhile, he may have put you and others at risk by potentially getting folks to do something that may have been illegal - without advising you of that risk. And you want to beat me up because I'm a novice investor... well I AM a novice investor, and it has absolutely NOTHING to do with the issues I have raised. The issues concern the possible fraudulent price manipulation of MANY DIFFERENT stocks using a posse of organized short-sellers operating at substantially the same time at substantially the same price AS DESCRIBED IN SECTION 9 of the SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT of 1934. Nothing more is being discussed other than that which I have presented to you. I also suck at golf, cannot stand on skis for very long at all, and my ability to throw a javelin is laughable... and those things have as much to do with the subject at hand as your insisting that I made a bad trade... nothing.

To: Don Pueblo who wrote (5745)	8/17/2000 3:28:39 PM
From: DWCraig	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 19428

"You can't take responsibility for your winners if you can't take responsibility for your losers, too." Auric, for one, won't take responsibility for his losers. For example, he called CIEN short at 34 5/8. It went up to 189 in four months. He has yet to acknowledge this loser, yet for all his blather one would think he never made a bad call.

To: Don Pueblo who wrote (5745)	8/17/2000 3:38:19 PM
From: sommovigo	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 19428

Tastes Like Chicken, With all due respect to you, it would be wise for you to take some time and learn a bit more about how the stock market works. Market makers, fund managers, and day traders all short stocks every day. I shorted a stock today. Does that mean I'm doing something illegal? I'm doing something wrong because I shorted a stock? No - BUT, if you and a bunch of your cronies decided to short the stock together at the same time at the same price, it could be considered an attempt at price manipulation. Look at part of section 9: 1 For the purpose of creating a false or misleading appearance of active trading in any security registered on a national securities exchange, or a false or misleading appearance with respect to the market for any such security, A to effect any transaction in such security which involves no change in the beneficial ownership thereof, or B to enter an order or orders for the purchase of such security with the knowledge that an order or orders of substantially the same size, at substantially the same time, and at substantially the same price, for the sale of any such security, has been or will be entered by or for the same or different parties, or C to enter any order or orders for the sale of any such security with the knowledge that an order or orders of substantially the same size, at substantially the same time, and at substantially the same price, for the purchase of such security, has been or will be entered by or for the same or different parties. and this also: 3 If a dealer or broker, or other person selling or offering for sale or purchasing or offering to purchase the security, to induce the purchase or sale of any security registered on a national securities exchange by the circulation or dissemination in the ordinary course of business of information to the effect that the price of any such security will or is likely to rise or fall because of market operations of any one or more persons conducted for the purpose of raising or depressing the price of such security. This last bit seems to describe the "bashing" that goes on as the posse shorts the issue it is bashing. In Auric's case, as a registered professional, he may be in more trouble than most.