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 : Classic TA Workplace -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: AllansAlias who wrote (43587)	6/27/2002 12:42:17 PM
From: Shack	Respond to of 209892

I think her name has lost some equity here regardless. The stock drop is justified IMO.

To: AllansAlias who wrote (43587)	6/27/2002 1:04:55 PM
From: bcrafty	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 209892

Yeah, you can argue either way In the WSJ yesterday or Tuesday there was an article on this exact subject and the undertone of the writer's take was that the business is doing fine regardless of what's going in with Martha's personal finances. But when someone is so closely tied (or perceived to be) to their business some people might think character flaws of the CEO are very relevant, and don't want to take any chances with their stock. It's like the old saying (I'm paraphrasing) "if you've lost money you've lost nothing, if you've lost health you've lost something, if you lose character you've lost everything." In a time of increasingly numerous corporate scandals, investors seem to have been voting with their feet pretty quickly lately.