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.

Strategies & Market Trends : Anthony @ Equity Investigations, Dear Anthony, -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Mama Bear who wrote (61110)	10/23/2000 4:24:36 AM
From: KevinMark	Respond to of 122087

Barb, this will be my last post on it, but my subjectivity regarding the NASD should have reversed the trades, stems from the NASD mission statement as follows: "To facilitate capital formation by creating the markets of choice–operated and regulated to achieve the most liquid, cost-efficient, technologically advanced, *and fair securities markets in the world–for the benefit and protection of investors."* That clearly didn't happen. The NASD shouldn't have thought twice about the matter. They should have reversed all the trades in order to *PROTECT* the investor. It's not like this occurs every month or year for that matter. It's EXtremely rare! >>>There were not that many shares traded sub 50, or even sub 90, and a very meager amount at 130. Take a look at that day's candle...almost all of the shares that day traded between 100 and 110, and most closer to 110 than to 100.<<< I disagree with this analysis. I watched the stock from open to close. I can tell you while the stock was halted, there was a fat "white candle" on the chart. The ? here is, how many shares were traded between 100 and 110 BEfore the halt, and then after? When the stock reopened at 1:30pm @ $130, I noticed shortly after the stock fell to 110-115 range, a block trade of approximately 750,000 shares. I don't think anyone would be buying 750k worth of EMLX @ $115 after the halt. There were realized gains here, maybe not $2.5billion per se, but certainly in the 100's of millions of dollars. Regarding manipulation: I never blame manipulation for my trading losses. Complaining is one thing, taking responsibility is another. I always take full responsibility for my trades. FWIW, I had EMLX on my list to short that am and did so at the open @ 111....http://www.siliconinvestor.com/readmsg.aspx?msgid=14273620 I tried to cover around 50, but the stock was halted about 30 seconds, before I covered. That trade has made me a much better trader, simply by the fact of taking profits when you have them. The deck is stacked against anyone who wants to tempt greed in this market. I learned the hard way. Message 14276287 Rest assured, manipulation is an every day event for the Nasdaq. Good traders learn how to benefit from it, bad ones fall victim to their endless bag of tricks, from flashing, dropping bids, to naked shorting. The list goes on and on. Just because the individual investor knows their place in the bread line, doesn't mean they should remain quiet about it. KM