BTW -- Just for full disclosure sake, it should noted that JBinPA has accused me of a number of things privately that were all untrue, including "pumping and dumping".
Dave, first of all, if you want to make private conversations public, that's your choice. I have more integrity than to disclose private conversations in a public forum but now, in this case, I'm forced to since your accusation is false and to imply that you proved anything untrue to me privately is a joke. You "proved" nothing to me privately. In fact, you only raised more questions in my mind.
First, I did not accuse you of a thing .... our PMs began with my contacting you and stating that I had read 10 or so posts of yours on this stock. I asked if you were now a paid promoter. Since I'd not read one word of disclaimer in these 10 posts I pointed out that if you were, it was in YOUR best interest and the best interest of the public that you disclose your involvement in EVERY POST you make on it. Even though I'd read NO disclosure at that time, it was obvious to me from your posts that you were now being compensated. I really didn't need your reply to validate that, it was obvious.
I even stated that believing you were one of the few ethical posters on SI, I found it difficult to understand that you would post on a stock for compensation and NOT disclose your involvement in every single post.
I SIMPLY SUGGESTED YOU ADD A DISCLAIMER TO EVERY POST YOU MAKE ON THIS STOCK !
You replied and explained you were trading off your 15 minutes of fame provided by Fortune or whover the hell it was. I found this interesting but more humorous to be candid.
You went on to state you fully disclosed everything on SI which to that time I had not known. You pointed me to a statement buried in a very busy thread header that most do not read since they do not change and to one post made when you initiated your promotional campaign.
I found it curious that in the header there is quite a bit of bolding yet, your disclosure, was buried deep at the end and not highlighted in any manner.
I found it humorous that you believed a single post was adequate legal disclosure of your involvement.
Since our private conversations, I now notice you've begun adding a disclosure to every post .... so who proved their point Dave ? Why bury disclosure if everything is so ethical ? My original point all along was made and you apparently agreed since you have begun doing what I initially suggested to you.
As you are want to do, I was inundated privately with links to company resumes, etc .. I found none of it of any interest but I did find another point you made privately of interest.
You stated to me that your initial buy in this stock was at .67 .... in another case, you stated your buy was 3-4 weeks ago. Those two statements clearly conflict since the stock was trading nowhere near .67 one month ago. If however, you did buy a month ago, anyone reading a chart can see where your buy was.
When I pointed out this discrepancy to you; well, suddenly, you were confused, or mistaken, or some such crap. You're not a sloppy guy Dave, not someone who doesn't pay attention to detail. I found your confusion interesting.
So, what point did you prove there Dave ? Just where did you prove me wrong about a thing ?
You then got irritated that I was asking questions even though promoting the stock is your JOB now. You should be pleased that people express interest. I didn't understand your irritation since it was only a total of 2 PMs I believe. I would have thought you'd have welcomed questions on this "investment". I was mistaken; to that point, I had not made one public post regarding your promotional campaign.
You seemed to think that your one post buried in the archives of SI cleared you of any responsiblity. After my later public post on your thread questioning your involvement, I received PMs from people who had bought this stock "because Dave posted it" ... "I trusted Dave" ... and had NO knowledge of your compensated involvement. A few even indicated they had exchanged PMs with you and you never mentioned your involvement. They stated they'd now be looking into it deeper and thanked me for questioning your involvement. So Dave, I believe I was proven right, not you ... your refusal to provide adequate disclosure on your public posts this past week was both intentional and misleading to the public. But, you knew that from the beginning Dave. Your reply will be that everyone is responsible for their own DD, I agree with you, I don't feel compassion for anyone, including you,if they do get duped. The reality though is that this company, you and I all know that this happens ... people buy "because Dave said to". That's the reality so please, save the lecture on DD.
As to your silly challenge Dave, let me put it this way, I've wasted far more time of this than I care to. You believe your challenge proves something .... it proves NOTHING Dave. To be honest, and if you are, you'll agree ... you could have bought shares a month ago in accounts you'd never show me .... in relatives names ... who the hell knows. You really think some silly challenge proves anything ? I guess you do ... guess you think the lemmings will step back and say, "wow, Dave made a big bet, he must be right" .... I think your challenge is a joke. It is why I never even acknowledged it.
I have also said that one must really trust management
I don't believe anyone should blindly trust anyone Dave. They should not trust management, they should not trust you.
For all you know, management could simply be using you. The chart shows that this stock has spiked the past month. You state you don't know if the company has others doing what you're doing ... hell, they could have 500 Dave's under contract. You apparently don't know this. The statement to trust blindly is simply foolish. People prey upon trust. For all you know, there are 500 Daves who will be compensated with stock they can sell in a year at .01 ! You've admitted you don't know.
Why do you think the company selected you to be a paid promoter ? They are using others trust in you to their advantage. You may be doing the same, willingly or unwillingly. I don't know and don't really care.
Any decision to financially benefit from other's trust is up to every individual. I'm no judge and jury, I just question motivation. I question any company with unaudited financials that resorts to this type of promotion BEFORE releasing their financials, it's that easy to understand Dave.
I'll close with this Dave, don't post publicly that you "proved" anything to me in private; you didn't, actually, you only raised more questions.
I am pleased though that you've begun to understand the need to disclose your involvement in every post, it's the right thing to do.
It's a shame you didn't do it from the get-go .... JB
EDIT
PS ... regarding your most recent PM I've just read after this post, no Dave, I am not negative and I don't think you're a "bad guy".
My original point was that I believe the public you are posting you has the right to know and see your paid involvement on every single post.
If you don't agree with that, that's your problem, not mine.
PPS ... my last post on this "investment". Good Luck ! |
