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 : Global Crossing - GX (formerly GBLX) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: CF Rebel who wrote (12708)	7/19/2001 9:28:01 PM
From: BWAC	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 15615

CF, No truer words than in your last two posts. Well said. "This is how shorting can cause unnecessary complications in the evolution of a company. Instead of a responsible company being allowed to pursue a rational business plan, it has to contend with the artificially contrived conditions that shorting gives rise to. This is not to say that shorting is wrong in every case, but it does do real damage to even the best of companies. Companies ought to have to contend with real obstacles, not artificial ones." "Since when is a short an "investor?" An investor owns a share of a business or asset. A short borrows, without explicit permission from or payment to a non-dividend paying stock's share owner. " And the current level of short selling in GX and the overall market is swamping the buying interest, so much so that legitimate share sellers can't even get a fair price for their "investment".

To: CF Rebel who wrote (12708)	7/23/2001 4:02:13 AM
From: DukeCrow	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 15615

<<Instead of a responsible company being allowed to pursue a rational business plan, it has to contend with the artificially contrived conditions that shorting gives rise to. This is not to say that shorting is wrong in every case, but it does do real damage to even the best of companies. Companies ought to have to contend with real obstacles, not artificial ones.>> I would argue that a responsible company following a rational business plan wouldn't need to rely on its stock price to keep the business running smoothly. Any damage done to the company isn't real but imagined. And if a low stock price really does damage a company, then I don't think that company was being responsible or rational.