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 : QGLY - Funny Name Great Product. -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: drakes353 who wrote (7168)	1/9/1998 2:07:00 PM
From: VALUESPEC	Respond to of 8960

valuespec.com

To: drakes353 who wrote (7168)	1/9/1998 2:34:00 PM
From: John A Satriano	Respond to of 8960

Drake: No need to remind me that I was WRONG-O on the big Quig You are right, I apologize for that one. There is plenty of space in Q's trading patterns for both longs and shorts to make or lose money. IF some of the selling shareholders are out doing OTC collars write call/buy put) or shorting against the box they are in effect selling without have the filing deemed effective Agreed, but in order for this to be a valid hypothesis, we need a "why". Since, as you pointed out, these shareholders can sell whenever they want with a 144 registration, why bother? Here is my point: when the SB-2 was first filed, it was easy to create a 'sinking ship' scenario. This would be the only explanation for insiders selling nearly 1/3 of the outstanding stock of the company. However, many many months later, that scenario loses it's viability. Unless company insiders knew ALMOST A YEAR IN ADVANCE that they would have a sinking ship (ridiculous thought), the sinking ship theory goes out the window. What we are left with is a registration of shares. These shares can probably be sold without further registration, but so what? The same goes for every share held by the public. That doesn't mean they will all be sold on the same day, or that they will be sold at all, or that the stock price will suffer for it. No doubt some will be sold. Selling stock is the only way to realize a profit from it. Why do you think the stock is down so much in the face of solid fundamental news? Well, I'm not sure why you are asking my opinion. I am not an investment professional, nor even an expert. FWIW my opinion is thus: I own many stocks. They go up and down, without anything really changing. When they go down, it's a good time to buy. When they go up, it's a good time to sell. So far, this is the only thread I have encountered where folks need conspiracy theories to explain stock price movement in both directions. Q is definately a volatile stock. With only 17M shares outstanding, it doesn't take much selling to drive it down. On the other hand, it doesn't take much buying to drive it up. I've seen it happen both ways many many times. I expect that in a few years, after a few more splits , there will be enough float to stabilize the stock better... but no stock remains stable. One last point: I have no doubt that at least part of the reason the stock has dropped so low is that online characters have done a fair job of convincing people that some of these conspiracy theories are true. This causes some stockholders to sell, and others to stay away who would have bought. J.S.