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 (10109)	6/30/2002 4:56:22 AM
From: get shorty	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 19428

Dude, I suspect a fair amount of the abuse heaped upon you is derived from the fact that your reasoning is self-serving and flawed. You've repeatedly objected to the dissemination of false information by shorts. How many incidents do you know of a short being fined, censured, or incarcerated for publishing or disseminating false information? Do you think for every one example you might find, that I could find five examples of a long suffering those consequences, for the blatant misrepresentation of facts? So, although instances of disinformation are greatly skewed towards the longs, your gripe is with the shorts? I hear an axe grinding. You've also objected to shorts exaggerating problems or troubles that a company might have. So, when you agree that a company has problems, what is exaggeration? When the short posts his opinion more than once? twice? five times? When they use foul language in their posts? Are you the guy that makes the determination when they've exaggerated? Uhhh right, I must have missed that memo. You've complained that the shorts don't care about the shareholders that are going to lose their shirts. They're only in it for the money. When you or another long buy a stock, how much thought do you give about the short, who might lose money as a result of your purchase? Should that be one of the criteria in a longs decision-making process before he buys a stock? Do the analysts think about that before they issue a "stong buy" recommendation? Do you hold shorts to a higher moral standard than longs? The fact is, it's a win-win situation when you can help the longs and make money on your short. Unfortunately, some of them are dumber than Helen Keller, and they can't/won't be helped. Lastly, your droning on about the enterprise and how Tony's indictment should, or is, going to change the face of short-selling. Puhleeze. I certainly don't mean to trivialize Tony's problems, but in the grand scheme of things, it's a little ripple in a very big pond. Tony was indicted, not short-selling. Your inability to separate the two, leads me to believe that you held a stock that did a Lucitania, after Tony released a report on it.