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.

Gold/Mining/Energy : ARAKIS: HIGH RISK OIL PLAY (AKSEF) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: J. M. Burr who wrote (7602)	1/11/1998 1:18:00 PM
From: Larry Brubaker	Respond to of 9164

Tumbleweed: I thought outsiders to a company (e.g. Sands and State Street) had to report trades once they reach a certain percentage of shares (10%?) owned, but I also thought insiders had to report trades REGARDLESS of how many shares they own. If that is the case, it would not matter how many shares Kahn owns, he would have to report the trade if he sells. Anyway, what my question was getting at is if State Street owns X% shares, and they are not selling, and insiders own Y% shares, and they are not selling, and Sands has come in and acquired 11% of the shares in less than a year, it seems strange that the price would go down. I don't follow this company closely enough anymore to remember what X% and Y% equal these days. I guess its possible with 90 million shares out there, Sands could come in and buy 10 million, have no sales by State Street or insiders, and still see the stock fall; if pretty much all of the little guys holding the stock bailed during the last year. I did.