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.

Pastimes : A@P VOTE: Guilty or Innocent? -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Smiling Bob who wrote (300)	6/4/2002 9:24:35 PM
From: PartyTime	Respond to of 717

From A@P's post: >>>"...you reccommend stocks that shouldnt be bought and ..You have no Fundamental basis for your picks."<<< This phrase sorta reminds me of the extreme hot IPO market where every dot.com got relentlessly bought and relentlessly recommended as varying buys by hordes of analysts who were more in on a take than the actual quality or capability of a company. Curiously, did Elgindy short CMGI and ICGE to the bottom, or did he just do the bingo stocks which came his way? And what of Joe Stock who, perhaps not with lots of investing experience, bought a stock based on an impression that the stock seemed to fit well with the Internet revolution, and Joe Stock saw hope in it thus becoming a champion or an innocent guy along the sidelines. What was his vantage point? Indeed, Poor Joe saw numerous plays like like Amazon and others with soaring share prices none of which at the time were predicated on fundamentals. What happened to Joe Stock? A@P, et. al., his legions, CraigGoon's legions, all with their short rags, very organized, suddenly appear from nowhere only heaping insult here, untruths there, this distortion, that distortion, everyone invested became a POS or had a stem cell problem or whatever--hey, call it The Shortquake! And Poor Joe who didn't do anything wrong except try to make a call, suddenly's taken to the cleaners, the short parade wrecking its havoc. Whether the company was a good one or not didn't matter: Joe Stock was not a bad guy and didn't deserve what he got. I'm see it written that lots of the Enterprise-targeted companies were bad. So whose done the study? How many went belly up and how many recovered? How many companies that weren't impacted by the so-called conspiratal Enterprized shorties went belly up and how many actually recovered and performed well later on? Again, where the study? I'll close by once again writing there ain't nuthin' wrong with a fair up and a fair down. But I gotta chime in much of what I've seen over the years within the confines of these posting forums had little to do with a fair up and a fair down, analysts behavior included. Insidetruth.com? Forsoothe!