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 : Qualcomm Incorporated (QCOM) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Art Bechhoefer who wrote (130161)	7/16/2003 5:18:27 AM
From: Elroy	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 152472

CSFB is engaging in the usual manipulation to get the price down either to cover a short position or to buy the shares before they respond to stronger than expected earnings. In my view, the kind of tactics engaged in by investment firms to manipulate stock prices for their own benefit is tantamount to false advertising and could be prosecuted under the Lanham Act, a federal law that provides penalties for misleading or deceptive claims. This is paranoia on your part. The division in CSFB that makes these ratings/estimates changes (Research) has virtually no relationship with the division within CSFB (asset management) that might have a short position in QCOM. One group is full of research analysts advising institutional clients, the other group is an institutional client in and of itself, and the compensation of the two groups are COMPLETELY unrelated. Given that, two comments: 1- The analyst has no incentive to help the asset management division to do well. He gets no compensation if the CSFB asset management funds outperform. 2- If this EVER happened (the analyst colluded to help the asset manager) in the past 20-30 years, don't you think ONCE it would get exposed? You know, somebody's secretary blows the whistle, some asset manager reveals the trick, ever? Elroy