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.

Biotech / Medical : GUMM - Eliminate the Common Cold -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Mark Marcellus who wrote (3846)	4/16/2001 12:53:36 PM
From: Mike M	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 5582

Beauty continues to be in the eye of the beholder, doesn't it Mark? An equity position for an old line company like Wrigleys is not likely to involve such intricate trading details as hedging. I think this speculation is nothing more than the idle prattle we have seen on this thread time immemorial. Perhaps Wrigleys simply knows enough about GUMM to make a modest investment which both helps GUMM's finances and allows Wrigleys to profit both from their investment in the plant and their market acumen. The less jaded could find this a plausible scenario. If it makes you feel better go ahead and play it up with your interpretation. I am beyond concern over any long term impact the shorts and other detractors may have at this point. This company is in the capable hands of CSFB and has weathered a very difficult market quite well. It bottomed out before the end of 2000 and has demonstrated good technical action since. Regarding the inability to break out after the announcement, I think it is really quite obvious that there was still enough short influence to break the rally. My guess, however, is that hedge funds and other professional shorts will begin to lose interest in this short as the risk to reward shift makes the position more tenuous. As the retail shorts are left to deal with future news events we are likely to see a diminished ability to punish good news. If it did happen it quite likely happened over a period of days which not so coincidentally occurred during GUMM's swoon into the 6's and 7's. By the way, after the announcement, the stock did not trade below 7 and closed in the 8's both days. Oh, and I sincerely doubt that the announcement was included in the ten day averaging period. I know you aren't short but continue to marvel at your disdain for this little company. I would think a more open mind would be healthier when searching for short candidates.