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.

Politics : Formerly About Applied Materials -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Gottfried who wrote (41052)	12/21/2000 8:58:36 PM
From: Math Junkie	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 70976

The money above $6 was actually there, since it passed from some number of buyers to some number of sellers, but what was never there was enough money to cover all the shares outstanding at those prices. There was only enough money present to cover the number of shares that actually changed hands each day. The rest was fictitious, i.e., "paper gains".

To: Gottfried who wrote (41052)	12/21/2000 9:43:10 PM
From: FJB	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 70976

But if someone bought a stock in '94 at $6, watched it ride up to $80 and down again to $30, without selling, then the money above $6 never was. The person who bought at $6 can sell tomorrow for $30. How can you say "the money above $6 never was"? Bob