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 : TITAN CORP. -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Pink Minion who wrote (926)	8/31/2000 1:39:56 PM
From: Ben Wa	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1080

Given that the Barron's article contained errors, and that two anonymous research reports were circulated - if the schoolteacher based an investment decision on those as inputs, he/she would be basing a sell decision on incorrect information. If enough people act in that manner, the issue of the stock going down becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy - but if as you argue, an inaccurate Barron's article, two bogus research reports, a David Tice piece that could be best used for absorbtive properties at the bottom of a bird cage are coincidences, then perhaps the "no comment" phrase mentioned by a San Francisco hedge fund manager in the San Diego Union article was just because he was late for an appointment and just didn't have time to speak to the reporter...right? Essentially, you have suggested that if stories are circulated that if true, would be detrimental to the welfare of a stock, that people should sell their stock. That is insane.