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 : Auric Goldfinger's Short List -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Sir Auric Goldfinger who wrote (8695)	12/10/2001 3:40:09 PM
From: Tim Luke	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 19428

We would encourage readers to not be dumb." >>>>>>>>> LMAO yeah like shorting invn ...

To: Sir Auric Goldfinger who wrote (8695)	12/10/2001 4:00:19 PM
From: Don Pueblo	Respond to of 19428

The best part is the IFC guy thought it was so insightful that he reprinted it.

To: Sir Auric Goldfinger who wrote (8695)	12/10/2001 6:11:15 PM
From: Mike M	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 19428

This is the part I like AG: <<On occasion, we even find out the short-sellers are right. More often, we find they are wrong but there is enough of a kernel of truth that Wall Street will listen and the stock will fall anyway. >> <<Frankly, I think short selling success in small-cap companies is about 25% predictive (shorts predicted problems in advance) and 75% causative (shorts caused or exacerbated the problems by their tactics),...>> oh, and this: <<Unfortunately, a concerted short selling "attack" can and does take down promising companies whose only fault was under- capitalization and an inability to handle the PR/IR aspects of a short attack. Is that fair? No, but it's a fact of life until regulators decide they ought to get involved. When this happens, short-sellers -- never a modest bunch -- will crow about how right they are.>>