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.

Non-Tech : Bill Wexler's Dog Pound -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: BinkY2K who wrote (8196)	8/1/2001 9:02:03 AM
From: Hank	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 10293

The fact is that most companies that sue are typically small companies that have consistently lost money quarter after quarter. If they are a legitimate company, then they are smart enough to know that wasting time and money on lawsuits to chase bashers is both a waste of time and of what little money they have. Those that sell stock to survive can't afford to let bad news get out because if it does, they don't sell stock, and they don't get funding. So, they sue as a last resort. I'm sure if somebody wanted to bash a blue chip stock with false accusations then that company would sue the hell out of them because they have the money and lawyers to do so. However, nobody is dumb enough to do that since they know they are taking on a legitimate and powerful enterprise. Small companies will always have detractors whether they are legitimate or not. Just look at the short interest on virtually any NASDAQ biotech, for example, and you will find some short sellers, especially for those that haven't turned a profit yet. It doesn't mean they should go out and sue everyone that has a negative opinion of them. Their focus should be to turn a profit as soon as possible and keep doing so. Executing a valid business plan will accomplish this no matter what anyone else has to say about it. So what if Wexler says REFR will never sell any SPD products? Does what he or Asensio say have anything to do with REFR's success or failure? NO. Only REFR can determine that by actually putting their products on the market in a timely fashion like they say they are going to. That's by basic point. However, if REFR doesn't follow through on their promises, then how long do you think it will take disgruntled shareholders to sue them? My guess is not long.

To: BinkY2K who wrote (8196)	8/1/2001 11:08:25 AM
From: Hank	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 10293

About the AREM tactic- In light of the recent article posted by Bill, it would seem that the AREM tactic of reissuing shares is just a ploy to obfuscate the reality behind their phony accounting. They want to force a squeeze in order to give all the longs a chance to bail. Otherwise, you can bet a shareholder lawsuit is next. I'm not sure that all trades are done legitimate. In fact, I'm sure there are people breaking the rules all the time. The Street is a crooked game, just like a casino, and anybody that isn't aware of that is looking to get raked over the coals. That's why sound long term investments in good companies are the only investments that offer any margin of safety. Trading is fun but it's a game of odds. You have to think like a bookie to win. If I sell short a stock, I can not guarantee the market maker that represents by broker isn't shorting naked on my behalf. Should I be punished for this? Only MM's have the power to pull this off, not investors like those that post here.