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.

Technology Stocks : IFMX - Investment Discussion -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: James A. Shankland who wrote (9797)	3/4/1998 11:03:00 PM
From: Robert Graham	Respond to of 14631

Thank you, Jim. I am bullish on IFMX too, as you have figured out. I am careful to not allow myself to become enthused by a stock, in particular one that I can show substantial paper losses in. I think this stock needs a continued pattern of good news that comes out in the bottom line of this company. A few big account wins with large dollar figures would help here, along with another positive earnings report. The next earnings report will prove to me if IFMX is moving toward financial recovery. In the mean time, I will be looking at my first opportunity to write CCs. Given the lack of premiums available on CALL options, I think I will need to wait for a move up in the price that is the result of positive news. I will have to act quickly since there appears to be downward pressure being placed on the stock. However, I am confident that IFMX will remain for the time being near its present level. I would like to think there are other people listening to what I have to say. But for some to think I can manipulate the price of the stock just by what I have to say here at SI? I am flattered. ;) Bob Graham

To: James A. Shankland who wrote (9797)	3/4/1998 11:59:00 PM
From: Phuoc Le	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 14631

>>I've never understood the attitude by some here that any sound other than the most optimistic noises is an unwelcome distraction. We're supposed to be investors here, folks, not cheerleaders; we need to consider the strongest possible arguments for all predictions, and then make up our own minds which one we find most plausible.<< Jim (or do you prefer James?), if you read my response to the other poster, I said the same thing. I believe that both sides of the story needs to be heard. As for the comment about Bob, that was also the other poster's comment. I was merely thanking him for clarifying his position about Bob. I don't want to accuse Bob of anything, since I welcome his analysis of the situation, even if it differs from mine. If Bob's reading this, I want to apologize if it seems like I'm picking on him. He gave a lot of useful comments over on the ASND thread too. Phuoc