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 : Dave Gore's Trades That Make Sense -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: id who wrote (5939)	4/19/2002 1:56:59 PM
From: Dave Gore	Respond to of 16631

id, it's wise to play devil's advocate. Buying any stock properly should involve lots of DD and common sense. Normally a low share/high demand situation should cause a stock to rise. It almost always does. If not right away, eventually. OTHER STOCKS BEHAVING (or that behaved) SIMILARLY: SMID (with a very low PE of 3.5) and tremendous fundamentals is having a hard time rising to what it's worth (at least, so far) and it only has 3.31M shares O/S. Sometimes the MM's must be convinced that people really are INVESTING and holding and not just flipping. Sounds strange, but that happens once in awhile. With HQNT, Dr. Laipply has over 1M shares and there has been very little selling the last couple months, so it's hard to figure out why that is. But then again the volume hasn't been killer yet either, like it might become eventually, (even though this is apparently already the biggest BUY and OVERALL volume month in the company's history) ACF, remember, sat around for weeks at $18-20 and then took off and now is around $40. ** SGR kept falling and then basing around $18-20 for many weeks even with a great earnings report and very low PE. It then took off after getting "re-discovered" and recently hit $33+. Regarding the "e", they have 30 days to get the audit in. When they do it comes off.

To: id who wrote (5939)	4/20/2002 8:53:03 AM
From: StkProfit$	Respond to of 16631

Re: HQNT--devil. I'm a little rusty since I haven't traded regularly for last two years (finally back to being a regular last couple weeks), but here's my understanding: Two years ago the SEC began requiring OTC's to file audited financials (where previously Tom, Dick, and Harry Inc could have an OTC stock with nothing behind it and with no one checking up on them.) Once the OTC filing system was in place, an "E" was affixed to any OTC that did not have its financial report duly recorded with the SEC on time. (Note: after a period of time a non-reporting OTC will go to the pick sheets until they file a properly audited form in order to gain compliance.) It has been my observation that MM's generally like to short OTC's that are heading for the "E" on the general assumption that investors will become nervous and sell their shares just before or after the "E". Occasionally, MM's get caught with their pants down (as few MM's really follow their stocks as closely as Dave Gore <g>), and as such they start a merciless stream of MM games until they can dig themselves out of their shortage pit. One can, however, demand action to salvage abnormally large shorting situations if one can prove to the governing bodies that substantially more shares have been sold than are legally known to exist (i.e. one must technically borrow shares in order to short them...although MM's are given some leeway to short a percentage without shares in order to maintain an orderly market). ...I assume Dave is just doing his homework on HQNT to make sure the (alleged) shorting situation by the MM's doesn't get too far out of control (to keep them honest). Just my 2cents on it. Regards, -Mark :-))