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.

Strategies & Market Trends : Stock Attack II - A Complete Analysis -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Challo Jeregy who wrote (29278)	2/4/2002 9:38:12 PM
From: Susan G	Respond to of 52237

Aside from quality accounting arising from this mess... (uh huh) letters like that might cause the media to start checking their facts before reporting them. Too many times lately I've heard cnbc say "it's not verified BUT" and then spread a rumor on nationwide TV, as everyone dumps first and asks questions later. A couple of libel suits against Media ought to do the trick! I feel sorry for those poor Tyco 401k holders and folks who don't even know they own the stock (there are many out there who have no clue what they own, and I'm not talking just mutual fund owners!) Many people buy whatever their broker or financial advisor pumps, and Tyco like Enron was a darling of wall street just months ago. Who's next is what I want to know!

To: Challo Jeregy who wrote (29278)	2/4/2002 9:43:15 PM
From: Captain Jack	Respond to of 52237

Challo-- for some unknown reason TYCs position makes sense. I midded the last drop and have been giving serious consideration of buying a little on this one. Most important it will be interesting to see what, if anything, the WSJ has to say to refute or apologize to TYC in the AM. Certainly they are not crass enough to ignore such a letter......... well maybe they are and that could be part of the reason many are finding IBD as the business newspaper of choice? Sensationalism belongs in the tabloids not business news... does the WSJ have 'fact' to back up this article? I canceled WSJ years ago--- may have been a great move...