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.

Biotech / Medical : Biotech Stock Picking for Charity - 2006 -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: scaram(o)uche who wrote (149)	1/4/2006 11:37:44 AM
From: Biomaven	Respond to of 592

I agree with Rick. This short portfolio has (I'm afraid) a far higher chance of winning than any other, simply because it will almost undoubtedly win (as Rick points out) if there is a down year for biotechs. So I'd say it's not in the spirit of the contest at all. If we were to allow shorts, I'd restrict them to say 20% of the portfolio. Peter

To: scaram(o)uche who wrote (149)	1/4/2006 11:43:37 AM
From: keokalani'nui	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 592

Way back in 2001 this issue was raised obliquely, not having to be faced head on. The feeling by then moderater and enforcer was "start a separate short-biotech portfolio contest." The Problem as I see it: to have an honest short portfolio you have to put up the % equity and be -% short, pay margin interest, own marginable stocks, follow the up-tick rule, etc. Wouldn't that mean, first, that there really could not be a 100% short portfolio? As some percentage would have to be in cash or treasuries, right? And about the marginable stocks, who's to say what can be borrowed short? Anyway, I'm against it for this contest. No puts, calls or cattle straddles. Just buy and hold, as the man said.