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.

Technology Stocks : WDC/Sandisk Corporation -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Sam who wrote (18400)	1/23/2001 8:29:07 PM
From: Ausdauer	Respond to of 60323

Sam, Merrill Lynch's action is reprehensible. To think that they can control the stock price to the degree that they did and even predict the stock's fall to within a few bucks after they axe it is ridiculous. Message 15124369 Aus

To: Sam who wrote (18400)	1/23/2001 8:30:24 PM
From: Art Bechhoefer	Read Replies (4) \| Respond to of 60323

Sam, while I'm not a lawyer, I do try to keep current on situations where a firm downgrades a stock and then starts buying it after it drops. The securities laws, as far as I know, don't address this problem very well. It is not the same as insider trading, where a person is privy to information not available to the public, and then trades on that information. But in recent years, there have been complaints charging fraud on the market. This is a relatively new idea--that an influential person or firm intentionally manipulates the stock price so as to take advantage of it for buying or selling. The only way that fraud on the market could be pursued would be in the form of a class action. And to prove it, one would probably have to show, for example, that after downgrading the stock, the firm started buying it for various accounts that it administers. This could be pretty difficult, particularly if the the firm that trades the stock is different from the firm making the recommendations. It is very frustrating to see unsavory, unethical attempts to profit from these scams going unpunished because it is difficult to pursue a successful action. Maybe the best solution is to use tire irons on the person's knees. Art

To: Sam who wrote (18400)	1/24/2001 8:55:35 AM
From: im a survivor	Respond to of 60323

<<<<Hopefully, Merrill's silly little game is behind us.>> Merrill's "silly game" cost me a lot of anxiety, and cost some people who sold a lot of money, while they [Merrill], according to some accounts of level 2 trading, were buying in the 20s and low 30s. Isn't there a law against that sort of thing? Or is it always just caveat emptor? Pisses me off. Sam >> Actually, yes...there most certainly are laws concerning the manipulation of stock prices.....however in instances with the houses, no matter how blatant it may be, there is nothing that can be done, because in oder for the sec to act, there must be proof to do so. Just because we all know the houses play these games, is not proof there is any wrong doing going on. Bottom line is this.....SNDK at $60...merril wants some shares, but wants em cheaper. They downgrade, stock drops to $25 and they are falling all over themselves at merril trying to buy. All they have to say is " we downgraded at $60, yes, but now that it is in the $20's we like it again and therfor are buying".....nothing wrong with that, no matter how blatant it was. This happens with many, many stocks. Instead of getting upset, take advantage I say. I am planning on sending Merril a Thank You note myself in a couple years I hope, for the sndk they allowed me to buy at $27 and $32 ( keeping fingers crossed <ggg>). Additionally, right before the downgrade, I went ahead and covered with jan 50's or 60's and then boom, down to the $20's we wen't, so naturally all the CC's expired worthless and I got to make a few bucks on them as well. Anyway, hopefully SNDK has many good days ahead. I am hoping to hold my current shares for quite awhile if the story stays as good as it is and looks for the next few years. Good luck to all longs.....any idea's if they will meet, beat or miss their numbers? Opinions ? Keith