To: rrufff who wrote (92231 ) 8/18/2005 1:19:14 PM From: Jeffrey S. Mitchell Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 122087 As an example of how polarized types like rrufff refuse to discuss allegations on their merits (and instead somehow think calling someone a "hedgie defender" constitutes an intellectual response), I challenge him to substantiate just one seemingly important part of Byrne's argument... Recall that in Byrne's conference call he said it was really hard to short Overstock stock because of his tight group of shareholders, including, aside from the usual friends and family, OSTK's Top 10 institutions (who control about a third of the outstanding shares according to Yahoo) about whom Bob O'Brien wrote have been "loyal to him [Byrne] and with him for the last decade." As I pointed out in a previous post:Hmmm... let's look at who the Top 10 was in 2004 and just how long and strong they are today... Heck, not only have the 2004 Top 10 reduced their holdings, the fact that six of ten companies are different in the last 12 months shows that the concept of there even being a Top 10 was a fabrication! Message 21604526 So, rrufff, here's your big chance-- prove to everyone here you can have a discussion of something on its merits. Since I can't remember a time when you've done so, I don't expect you to start now. OK, I admit I usually rapidly skim through your posts, so even if you (as I expect you will) feel some generic "how should I know" response is sufficient, I'm curious to see if you've ever provided any original research to confirm or deny anything of a contentious nature. - Jeff P.S. The real reason I wrote this was for Bob O'Brien's reply. We all know rrufff is all growl and no bite.