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 : Mr. Pink's Picks: selected event-driven value investments -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: walstmonky who wrote (17191)	10/12/2002 5:28:31 PM
From: Cogito	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 18998

>>Wow. I can't recall how many times I've read that some short seller was 'wrong' when a price fluctuation occurred. I know I've seen it several times on this thread alone. I suppose if you define 'impunity' as a guarantee that the price wouldn't fluctuate against you, you could say that.<< Walstmonky - That's certainly a valid point. I wouldn't define impunity as a guarantee against price fluctuations. I would say, though, that an 11% upward spike within three days of a "short with impunity" call stretches the definition of the word. Of course the fact that Dan Niles' stated an opinion, even if some other analysts tepidly agree with him, doesn't prove MP is wrong. ;-) I certainly don't mean to claim that I know more about investing or IBM in particular than MP does. His record is a lot better than mine, and I wouldn't have the guts to make such public predictions. I just wanted to tease him a little. I do have a question. If IBM was a great short on Tuesday, is it an even better one now? Seems that it might well be. What does Pink think? - Allen