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 : Altaba Inc. (formerly Yahoo) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: craig crawford who wrote (8794)	3/25/1998 11:09:00 PM
From: Mandinga	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 27307

>>>Good rationalization. A stock split and a break of 100 might change that. Shorts are definitely more scared than the longs. If YHOO went up 30 points and short interest stayed the same, imagine where it would go if the short interest dropped to 2 million. 120? 150? All it takes when shorts are in a fragile condition like this is a stock split or some huge teaming agreement with somebody to send the stock higher. Imagine if YHOO said it was going to charge for their service. Probably up 12 like AOL! Everybody loves YHOO and hates AOL. If YHOO said they were going to charge $5/month for their service but you got it free with an internet account I would switch from AOL in a heartbeat. I will probably switch here soon anyway. Are you kidding me? Shorts are ina much better position than longs at these valuation levels. Besides, if they start charging for service, would you pay for it? NOBODY WOULD MAN.

To: craig crawford who wrote (8794)	3/26/1998 12:33:00 AM
From: Michael Collings	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 27307

<< A stock split and a break of 100 might change that>> Craig, I have to ask this question.... If you are so sure this stock is going to $100 how come you are playing for 1/2 points? Why not go for the big kill? <<Anyway, the point I am trying to make is the short interest is essentially the same as when it was at 60 but YHOO is 30 points higher. What does that tell you? >> It tells me that when the percentage of shares short to the float was above 20% the shorts got squeezed. << Either way short covering wasn't as big a part of the move as believed>> I disagree and yes I suspect there was a lot of shorts covering to other shorts. When shorts cover, the supply decreases, and that causes the massive moves. Eventually the stock reaches a point when there are again more short sellers and that increases the supply again. When a stock is retesting old highs like it is right now, it is more likely at this point that sellers who didn't get out before will get out now. It is also likely that many of those that were purchasing at greater than $89 will be happy to get out without a loss. And it is also likely that any big players that haven't gotten out yet may take the opportunity to get out during a higher volume, higher price day. There's always a limit to how high these flyers go and in every case, i.e., IOM, ZITL, RMBS, etc. the shorts were eventually right. And in each case it was when the percentage of shorts to the total float came down.