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.

Pastimes : Richard Ney and the Wall Street Gang -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Winstonwolf who wrote (138)	1/30/1998 1:54:00 AM
From: BenYeung	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 492

Just a question, am I just smoking too much sh*t or are other people stupid. I came across many sites, and some people have been saying that short selling causes declines. ("I guess today's lack of buyers and the many short sellers cause the stock to go down on a up-market day.....") What happened to the up-tick/zero-tick rule? Even if Ney's Theory does not exist, I thought that only selling but NOT short selling will cause declines in stock prices, supported by the SEC rule of up/zero tick. This short-selling rule was implemented by the SEC to avoid the acceleration of stock prices. (but specialists/MMs can do whatever they want) If not, anybody with a large sum of money can short the heck of a thinly traded stock, accelerate the decline by causing a panic, and cover for a profit. Some people around these threads are so stupid that pisses me off. Unlike Fenton, some dont even have valid reasonings when they bash a company.