To: bill who wrote (1658 ) 10/22/2001 12:03:34 PM From: Peter W. Panchyshyn Read Replies (1) | Respond to Bill , I thought Stan might come back with this. You may wish to look over his posting # 1061 which started this area of discussion. As well as the subsequent postings, mine included. As is usual Stan presents no proof to support his claims. Just makes comments to try to drive down these trusts because his own due diligence has failed so miserably. At any rate the conclusion I arrived at was that if Stan were correct somebody would have presented the evidence and taken the participants to court and sued for many millions and the practise would have been stopped cold. As none have come to do that, and that the practise has not stopped ,means there is no manipulation going on whatsoever. That Stan himself has not taken any appropriate legal action on his own behalf means he has not one bit of proof. He and others do not play these trusts for the long term as they should be played. And when short term they position themselves in the wrong direction and they do not make anything or worse yet they loose. They cry fowl and look to lay the blame elsewhere instead of at themselves. If their going to pretend to be expert traders and aren't really then it should be no surprise that they have the results they have.
