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.

Non-Tech : Auric Goldfinger's Short List -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Edscharp who wrote (10095)	6/29/2002 1:08:54 PM
From: Bear Down	Respond to of 19428

Don't you and GaBard have a NAMBLA meeting today?

To: Edscharp who wrote (10095)	6/29/2002 2:38:16 PM
From: Kevin Podsiadlik	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 19428

Tell me, Ed, which of these courses shows "compassion for the small investor"? Voicing an honest opinion about a bad company, thus discouraging new investment and/or hastening the bad company's demise or Keeping silent about a bad company's misdeeds, allowing it to continue undisturbed until it eventually falls apart on its own, but in the meantime allowing many more shares to be bought by small investors over the course of time, at much higher prices? If he had any compassion for the small investor I certainly missed it. Put another way, which did more damage to the markets, Bre-X (which was picked apart by various rank-and-file short sellers) or Enron (which was above the investigation level of your everyday short seller, and of whom the people with access to the truth remained silent until it was too late)?

To: Edscharp who wrote (10095)	6/29/2002 2:50:41 PM
From: PartyTime	Respond to of 19428

Nice post, Edscharp! And I see it was exemplarily followed upon by one of great consciousness. Ironic, ain't it?

To: Edscharp who wrote (10095)	7/1/2002 2:00:50 PM
From: mmmary	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 19428

Ed, I was busy this weekend "Point 2, I agree that it is easier to short a loser company. I would also make the observation that it is to the advantage of the short-trader to embellish bad news of the 'loser' company in any way they can and I submit that they do engage in distortion, innuendo and half-truths to exaggerate the problems of the company to get an even steeper decline in share price that might otherwise have been." Generally the companies that tony and other very public shorters out are guilty of distortion, innuendo and half truths (if not utter lies) to exaggerate the pros of the company in order to sucker investors in so they can make money. I see tony's reports and they are 100% the truth. I see the companies he targets and they are generally flat out liars and he calls them liars. If anything, I think that 99% of the time it's the company that is doing the reverse of the short and distort, they are hyping. Maybe 1% of the time there are some less than ethical amateur shorters out there who short and distort. The professional shorters don't want to be sued or ruin their track record by not posting the truth. Maybe what you are seeing that is bothering you are some disgruntled ex employees/shareholders that got burned by the company posting some negative things that they can't verify with links, or maybe they are just posting lies. I don't think tony was doing that. He was a little over the top in the verbal abuse of the company but I really think they deserved it for lying, cheating and stealing from the investor. I went to a hearing where investors who were ripped off in a trust deed scam were able to tell the guilty party what htey felt. These little old ladies really chewed a new one into the con men. I can understand how they felt. Maybe you are just seeing the rantings of burned investors. Let them rant. They have a right.