SI
SI
discoversearch

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.
Gold/Mining/Energy : International Precious Metals (IPMCF) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: Anne Lamb who wrote (23614)10/28/1997 10:40:00 PM
From: Bob Staaf  Read Replies (3) | Respond to of 35569
 
Anne,
I think it is pretty simple using electronic trading. If the person placed a limit order a typed a 6 instead of a 5, and then failed to proof read his order.............BINGO.

Such a mistake is foremost in my mind every time I have placed an order. I have double checked every order I have made, and even gone back and reread the latest quote.

Could be too, someone was willing to risk a few bucks to try igniting a buying spree, although very unlikely.

If Mr. Banks could make his mistake, techstocks.com
then nothing is impossible. Sorry Chuck <bg> I hope it was a small order.

BTW did anyone catch the size of that purchase at 6 1/16 ?



To: Anne Lamb who wrote (23614)10/28/1997 11:20:00 PM
From: go4it  Respond to of 35569
 
Anne,

<<i'm still confused about this..I assume that some soul paid
6 1/16 for some shares? how could that happen?>>

They probably got around to posting the selling of my shares :-(

sulkingChuck



To: Anne Lamb who wrote (23614)10/29/1997 12:55:00 AM
From: Bob Jagow  Respond to of 35569
 
Two other services say the max was 5 1/8. NASDAQ had trouble with quotes all day--barely survived the volume.