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.

Gold/Mining/Energy : Canadian REITS, Trusts & Dividend Stocks -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: stan_hughes who wrote (1073)	6/12/2001 3:24:09 PM
From: David Alon	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 11633

Stan, what you say is true. But since it is a well known fact that they do it, the only way to protect yourself is to try to buy after the fact. Oil and gas trusts, are to be expected they will do it, not that I sanction it. Just look at Summit Reit(SMU), the same thing happened, and it is not an oil trust.

To: stan_hughes who wrote (1073)	6/12/2001 5:57:03 PM
From: Peter W. Panchyshyn	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 11633

If we don't stop these kinds of practices as and when they occur, confidence in the markets is undermined and the less moral among us will begin to believe they can act with impunity. Then we will have another Bre-X, or something like it. Anyone here want to find themselves invested in another Bay-Street-and-TSE-stamp-of-approval Bre-X? --------- Stan the very least you could do is to compare apples to apples and not apples to oranges. Or do you just have the facts confused. Here we are talking of trusts using the brokers deep pockets to obtain a predetermined amount -no cost to the fund - financing. Instead of going through the more costly practise of the trust going to market - absorbing all the cost and not knowing if it will all be worth the expense. The Bre-X incident was one in which core samples were salted to perpetrate a hoax. Two completely different things. Investors just like analysts have to go by what information is given to them. If that information turns out to be wrong or a hoax. Just who is to blame. Is it the investor? Is it the analyst? Is it the exchange? Is it the hoaxer? I take it for all your knowledge and acheivements and all your high and mighty attitude about right and wrong you would have been able to stop the Bre-X hoax before it started. Lets see how could a person have really accomplished this. Well lets see you would have gotten that sample and then gone your very own self to obtain a sample from the same area to see if it matched and was authentic. Now if this had been the only mine and the only mining company in the world you may have been able to do it. The truth is it was only one of thousands of samples from thousands of sites being explored by thousands of companies all over the world. Are we to believe that you alone would have been able to do the impossible. Like finding a needle in a hay stack. Just not possible. Not for anyone or any many, however that many maybe. So where does this leave us. Its up to the investor. He has to decide what is too good to be true and what isn't. Instead what happens. Joe average investor looks at how well Bre-X is doing in such a short period of time. He believes everything he is told not thinking for himself. Not bothering to do anything. Buys into the bullshit. Sees he is not doing to bad so decides he will mortgage his house. He can't lose. Then the shit hits the fan. Now instead of becoming a millionaire over night he has no where to live no savings. Well hell its not his fault. Its got to be somebody elses. Doesn't it. Now don't worry because guys like Stan here can protect you. Because its just not right. Its just not fair. Oh please get a shovel !!!!!! -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

To: stan_hughes who wrote (1073)	6/12/2001 8:08:10 PM
From: Lorne Larson	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 11633

stan: you're absolutely correct on this one. The brokers short sell into the issue, knowing they can cover at the issue price. The reason they can do this is they have prior knowledge of the new issue price. It's insider trading, and is completely illegal. Drives me crazy that our so-called regulators allow this nonsense to go on. This is of course an entirely different issue from whether APF could have done better than $11.50 on the issue, or whether APF is a bargain at this price.