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 : Crystallex (KRY) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Mama Bear who wrote (6483)	3/8/1998 12:13:00 PM
From: flightlessbird	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 10836

Babs: You have reached new depths of incompetence with your response. Here is what you wrote: ">>>I'm asking a very simple question: can you appreciate that a lower-priced stock has a greater risk factor when shorting?<<< No, I can't, because it's just not true. Your insistence on this is what leads me to believe that you are a market rookie. Barb" On the day that someone else can convince me that shorting a $1 stock poses less of a risk than shorting a $100 stock, I'll tip my hat to you Babs. In the mean time, I feel quite comfortable in knowing that someone who has demonstrated such an extraordinary lack of even remedial investing knowledge is on the OTHER side. This is basic risk assessment. When you short a stock at any price in the single digits, you simply HAVE to be aware that your downside is signficantly more exposed. How many times can I emphasize that a short position's loss is LIMITLESS, unlike a long position? Can you tie your shoes Babs? This is Remedial Investing 101. And when it is LIMITLESS, it is EXTRAORDINARILY risky to short at a price so low with so much room to run in the event of an unexpected steep rise. I can't come up with too many stocks (if any at all) that have exploded from $25 to $125 in a month, but can think of plenty from $2 to $10. And the worst of it is that you are so clouded by your fantasy short world that you call me a market rookie. LOL Just a week ago, Charred was calling me an inexperienced investor for not being able to see that you could hedge your long position by shorting a few shares. That is until I pasted Charred for his foolishness to such a degree that even Viper was compelled to say "You are right but go easy on Charred." Well, you have come awfully close to Charred's incompetence. At least one thing is consistent here. Assensio deals in distortion and an inability to confront even basic facts. At least his followers consistently apply these principles. And don't try that hogwash argument that you feel your downside is limited by the fact that KRY doesn't have a chance to win. Get real. Same bs that Viper used. This will be my last response to you (as my last response was to Charred) on the grounds that I refuse to engage in an intellectual battle with anyone unarmed. Your statement so badly exposes your inability to think lucidly that you are not WORTH any further responses. I'm sure you'll deliver some wiseass crack back so you can have the last word. That is fine. I think your ignorance is glaring and any snappy comeback could hardly undo your damage. You think a lower-priced stock does not present a greater risk? Oh that kills me. Why do you think out of the 15 stocks Mr. Assensio has chosen to recommend shorting that this is the only one in single digits? Just how long would Mr. Assensio last in this business if he made it a common practice to recommend to his clients that they short stocks in the single digits consistently. Even Mr. A. would tell you that would be pure suicide as an investment advisor. Market professionals/market makers can and often do do it, but even they will tell you that it is extremely risky and you better damned well either know what you're doing or control the market in which you trade. You certainly don't recommend that to clients. My hats off to you Babs. You get the Silver Medal in the Incompetence Marathon. Now go ahead. Get that last word in. REALLY shoot yourself in the foot and make me proud. LOL P.S. Chief: I'm sorry. It had to be said. I know I should have bitten my tongue and not responded but this one HAD to be said. I apologize profusely. "Decorum" mode now switched back on. :)

To: Mama Bear who wrote (6483)	3/8/1998 4:37:00 PM
From: Bob Walsh	Respond to of 10836

Re your answer to Flightlessbird's question: His question: "Can you appreciate that a lower-priced stock has a greater risk factor when shorting?" Your answer: "No, I can't, because it's just not true. Your insistence on this is what leads me to believe that you are a market rookie." Barb, hardly ever does a $100 stock go up 400% within a day or two, but there have been many cases where penny exploraton stocks go up by this amount. While from a text book perspective your answer would, in general, be correct, it does not take into consideration the huge volatility of penny exploration stocks. If you were talking about two manufacturing companies one priced at $1.00 and the other at $100, then you would be correct(except for a rare case). In the case of KRY, a favorable decision by the court could be worth $25 per share in additional value. Regards, Bob