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 : VVUS: VIVUS INC. (NASDAQ) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: blankmind who wrote (3837)	12/17/1997 5:56:00 PM
From: Jman	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 23519

I was watching CNBC this afternoon and they were going over the day's leaders in their school stock-trading program. The 4th highest group made their money today with VVUS - even elementary kids know that VVUS is way underpriced! I knew we'd get some positive press from CNBC someday <GGG> -Jman

To: blankmind who wrote (3837)	12/17/1997 6:58:00 PM
From: mc	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 23519

I also was informed by someone with access to Bloomberg of the insider sales. It is accurate. They occurred the last week or two of November. Why it didn't show up on the link posted earlier I have no idea. I also didn't write the numbers down because they sounded in line with what was posted earlier as coming from Bloomberg so I did not write them down to check their exactness, but, that's what Bloomberg is showing - why the differences, I don't know. Who is right? I would guess Bloomberg is. Gary

To: blankmind who wrote (3837)	12/17/1997 7:11:00 PM
From: Andrew H	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 23519

>>Andrew & David - get your facts straight. If you have info to corroborate your assertions, then post it. Otherwise, stick to the facts.<< Blankmind, don't try so hard to live up to your name. Relax. I don't know if the insider trades are fact or not. Neither do you. Two people have now reported they are. Threads discuss rumors as well as facts. We will see. I have been persuaded that even if they are facts, it has little meaning.

To: blankmind who wrote (3837)	12/17/1997 9:23:00 PM
From: LoLoLoLita	Respond to of 23519

>>-- Andrew & David - get your facts straight. >>-- All hard info posted shows no insider selling by the officers in >>Nov-December.-- If you have info to corroborate your assertions, >>then post it. >>Otherwise, stick to the facts. blankmind, Please re-read my two posts. It seems you have not understood them properly. That is the only reason I can think of that might explain your OFFENSIVE tone in a posting that appears directed towards both Andrew and me. To reiterate: I learned from a source who I consider very reliable that three insiders sold shares in the 20s in November. I posted this information because I believed it to be accurate as well as pertinent. My source obtained this information from a Bloomberg machine. I have no access to Bloomberg. If you are knowledgeable about SEC filing requirements, you should already be aware that Form 144s are NOT filed electronically, and that there can be significant delays in their reaching web sites, especially the "free" ones. I stated "the facts" as I know them, and most of the others who read my posts seem to have been able to understand them. As far as I know, you seem to be the only one who didn't understand them. I think that you owe Andrew and me an apology for your bellicose tone. David