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.

Biotech / Medical : GUMM - Eliminate the Common Cold -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: DanZ who wrote (4144)	6/23/2002 1:29:33 PM
From: Mad2	Respond to of 5582

Thanks for stating the obvious, Mad2. I would love to only be long stocks that go up and short stocks that go down. In fact, I would like to go long a stock at the low for the day, sell it at the high for the day and go short, buy it at the next lowest point during the day, and sell it at the next highest peak for the day and go short and... Too bad it doesn't happen that way, huh? At least not for me. Your welcome. BTW you suggest that you would like to trade, but you have been a unabashed long with regards to GUMM I didn't know that you were 100% on your trades. Another example of you ignoring facts in favor of your intrepretation. You have to pick and choose the stocks that you think will offer the best return on your limited capital, while at the same time understanding the risks and diversifying enough so you don't get blown out. I have at times taken too large a position in a single company. It has both made me a bundle and cost me a bundle. But that's not the issue. My point is out of the universe of stocks, would you rather be short a stock that goes down 20% or one that goes down 90%? This is where we differ. If I beat the market averages, I feel like I'm doing well. Again we differ. Look to absolute returns. Bear markets have been know to last 7-13 years and provide near zero returns based on averages. Anyway Dan you have been a bit narrow minded about GUMM (now MTXX) and the point of my post was to critize your justification (your claim it has dropped less than the NASDAQ average) for supporting/promoting GUMM while it was at unrealistic valuation. BTW MTXX has underperformed the $compq since hitting its high on 2/2/00 and significantly underperformed the S&P 500 stockcharts.com (adjust the above perf chart to the date 2/2/00 to view Message 12786315 Message 12751598 Message 12755299

To: DanZ who wrote (4144)	6/23/2002 1:58:19 PM
From: Mad2	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 5582

Here's another interesting comparison See Auric's post on QGLY vs GUMM lawsuit, announced June 8, 2001 Message 15914812 If you would have bought QGLY youd be up 275% compared to 15% with GUMM/MTXX over the same period stockcharts.com mad2

To: DanZ who wrote (4144)	6/23/2002 6:19:49 PM
From: Hank	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 5582

"I have at times taken too large a position in a single company. It has both made me a bundle and cost me a bundle." Oh really? I thought the key was to "diversify"? "However, I am pleased to say that my MTXX stock has done very well this year, and that my overall portfolio is up for the year because of it." Hmmm. When many stocks are down 50% or more for the year, you claim to be up overall because of MTXX, even though it's up only 35% for the year. You are either 1) a liar or 2)a pauper that can only afford to hold 2 or 3 positions at any one time or 3) an idiot that doesn't know how to learn from his mistakes and have once again over weighted your portfolio in favor of MTXX. Which is it Danny Boy? Oh I KNOW! Even though you claim you don't aggresively trade this stock, you just HAPPENED to buy at the low and sell at the high! You are an amazing man Danny Boy! Do you walk on water too? "In fact, I would like to go long a stock at the low for the day, sell it at the high for the day and go short, buy it at the next lowest point during the day, and sell it at the next highest peak for the day and go short and... Too bad it doesn't happen that way, huh? At least not for me." Huh??? But you claim to "UP" on MTXX this year. Considering the fact that you've ridden this POS all the way down from the 30's, there is only one way you could be "UP" on MTXX!! You must be a skillful and amazingly adept trader! Yet you claim NOT to be trading MTXX aggresively! Golly gee Danny Boy. So many contradictions in your statements! You've got more gas than a smoking pile of camel dung.