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.

Gold/Mining/Energy : Nuvo Research Inc -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: axial who wrote (10552)	8/13/2002 11:23:01 PM
From: Joe Krupa	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 14101

Jim, "Where are the American buyers? The institutional buyers? They are very good at hiding their buys - how many people even guessed at the extent of the Canada Pension Plan's holdings? (Thanks, for that, Joe)." I just made that observation to somebody I was talking to today. You're the only person to key in on that point so far. In the past 6-9 months, the CPP bought 769,945 shares of DMX on the open market without anyone noticing! So anyone who said there was no institutional buying was, obviously, simply wrong. "I have yet to see the proof that Acqua was the wrong decision. Personally, I don't like it any better than others, when the price gets scuppered: but the reality is, the price is holding up well, in a BAD market." Over 1 out of every 5 shares sold since January 29, 2002 have been Acqua shares. The math is simple: (January 29, 2001 to August 13, 2002) Total shares traded - 24,298,400 Total shares traded by Independant Trading (84) - 2,985,559 Total shares traded, less IT (84) - 21,312,841 Total shares sold by Acqua - 4,584,554 % Total trading accounted for by Acqua - 21.6% Considering a 21.6% overhang of shares during "the greatest bear market in recent history," I'd agree that the price has held up reasonably well. joe

To: axial who wrote (10552)	8/15/2002 12:22:33 PM
From: twentyfirstcenturyfox	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 14101

I posted #10546 to Morag. He replied #10548. Everything was civilized so far. You entered into that discussion (which you are entitled to do, of course,) when you replied #10552 to him, to include the following; <quoting Morag: "On the other matter, REK's holdings I know there has been a lot of debate about the transfer of her shares. If her shares were actually sold on the market it would have been even more disruptive than AW." My, oh my, it's nice to hear someone say that! You are the first poster (that I can recall) who has ever confirmed the fact that sale of RK's shares would have meant the sale of more than 50,000 shares a day, for more than a month of trading days. The shares were transferred - that's obvious. There is absolutely no evidence to suggest that they have been sold. There are a lot of unknowns in DMX. Many posted thoughts, and opinions are treated as "facts" - when they are not facts. Anger and frustration are no substitutes for thinking clearly. Many conclusions about Acqua are suppositions: not facts. I have yet to see the proof that Acqua was the wrong decision. Personally, I don't like it any better than others, when the price gets scuppered: but the reality is, the price is holding up well, in a BAD market. Good, level-headed post, Morag. Well thought-out. Thank you. Jim. end quote> Jim, I don't wish to get into a slagging match with you - let's leave that to the SH forum. So, just learn to accept that sometimes it is the questioning posters who precipitate the good posts - and don't dump on them. Fox.