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: Brander who wrote (24188)11/3/1997 8:38:00 PM
From: go4it  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 35569
 
Brad,

The talk about the gaps to $50 were not for real. I think Bob was just having some fun being as ridiculous in the other direction as those talking about IPM going to zero. At least that is my opinion.



To: Brander who wrote (24188)11/3/1997 9:42:00 PM
From: Bob Jagow  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 35569
 
"remember that most gaps are eventually filled", with breakout gaps a common exception.



To: Brander who wrote (24188)11/3/1997 9:45:00 PM
From: Bob Markley  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 35569
 
Brad,

The $50 gap number was to make a point of how stupid the shorts are in regards to risk/reward.

Yes, ... a gap of $10-15 is much more probable. Most gaps do get filled in the market with the exception of about 15%, ... those normally being a 'blast off gap' when the stock has a major change of investor sentiment and never looks back! The BD/Bateman report hopefully could be just that.

Regards,
Bob


HomeMailHotSubjectMarksPeopleMarksKeepersSettings
Terms Of UseContact UsCopyright/IP PolicyPrivacy PolicyAbout UsFAQAdvertise on SI
© 2026 Knight Sac Media.  Data provided by Twelve Data, Alpha Vantage, and CityFALCON News