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.

Politics : Welcome to Slider's Dugout -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Bituman who wrote (6653)	10/10/2007 11:48:45 PM
From: Tommy Moore	Respond to of 50758

Obviously you are doomed by your DNA

To: Bituman who wrote (6653)	10/11/2007 1:39:54 AM
From: Webster Groves	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 50758

Had you been paying attention, you'd remember Slider's post of a few weeks ago where he warned us that GS would spike up because it was massively shorting the CDO holders. wg

To: Bituman who wrote (6653)	10/11/2007 10:16:00 AM
From: RonMerks	Respond to of 50758

Re- Slider on 'Goldman and Shit Stats' Responding ToMessage #6654 from Bituman at 10/10/2007 11:40:06 PM And to think 98% of you drove a stake into their heart and left them for dead just a few weeks ago (vbg). Slider, that is a shit stat...and I mean that with due respect I agree. Slider, once again you're painting the whole thread here with the same broad brush. 98%? Come one. No more than 96% of posters here drove a stake through Goldmans heart <vbg>. We all remember how well received your posts on being bullish on Goldman were here. And not just yours. Remember this post? Message 23810800 And these types of responses? Message 23810856 98% negative on Goldman? How in the world could you come up with that <ROTFLMAO?> Hell, we all knew Goldman would bounce right back to new highs, that the subprime blow up would be nothing more than a mere speedbump and that the DOW would soon explode to new all time highs. So why are you painting us all with a 98% broad-brush, when there's just no possible way it was more than 96% <LMAO>? Ron