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.

Technology Stocks : Semi Equipment Analysis -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: AJL who wrote (7233)	11/27/2002 10:18:56 AM
From: zonder	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 95520

OT - my two cents re "shorting is un-American" >>is there not then a naturally inherent desire to see negative publicity on a company that you are short, to see things begin to unravel causing the stock price to fall, the further the better Probably. But stock prices do not follow wishful thinking, you know. So if I short QQQ and wish it would go down 20% overnight, it is not really a crime since it will not affect anything. >> that seems "un-American" or at least unpatriotic I am not American, and I often have trouble understanding why you guys deem certain things "un-American". This is one of the most puzzling examples, and that is against some competition. You see there is excess capacity in telecom, there is a new technology called DWDM that allows for multiple traffic on a single optical line so investments will never get to where they were, and telecom carriers are popping right and left. Now if you sell calls on telecom equipment stocks, how is that un-American? Or how is buying those dogs and losing money American?

To: AJL who wrote (7233)	11/27/2002 10:19:25 AM
From: BWAC	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 95520

Lets try a different shorting theory: When done in mass, in a pile on environment, at ever increasing record levels, the "real" investors or owners of the stock don't have a chance in hell of exiting at a fair value price. The supply and demand for shares is so skewed by the sheer volume of non-existent shares being created by short selling. Thus, when done in extremes, the "value" of a company is often determined more by the short sellers of fictitional shares than by the real owners of an economic interest in the company. And that isn't right.

To: AJL who wrote (7233)	11/27/2002 10:22:21 AM
From: AJL	Respond to of 95520

In rereading Brian's posts, I see that the point I am making regarding shorting is distinct from Brian's, and I apologize for any inference to the contrary. AJL

To: AJL who wrote (7233)	11/27/2002 10:26:06 AM
From: Proud_Infidel	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 95520

OT-Shorting Well said AJL. This is from a PM I recently sent: BTW, this may sound terrible, but I do not feel one iota of sadness that these people lost their shirts betting on Armageddon. The alternative would be that their pockets are full, but the world is one pile of rubble.

To: AJL who wrote (7233)	11/29/2002 11:48:32 AM
From: Pink Minion	Respond to of 95520

>> its just that I don't find it comforting cheering on the demise of a company or sector; to me, that seems "un-American" or at least unpatriotic. Very few shorts are a hold to zero. What's un-American is allowing the inefficient flow of capital that high stock prices causes. What's un-American are insiders stealing money from hard working American shareholders. What's un-American is the job losses caused from this bubble. 90% of my friends from Nortel have lost their jobs there and they were there way before 1995. Shorting is about making money which is very American.