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 : Apple Inc. -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Eric Yang who wrote (14174)	5/30/1998 6:17:00 PM
From: Eric Yang	Respond to of 213177

Corrections... "They jump into conclusion without thoroughly examining the facts or doing the necessarily (necessary) research." "I'm no accountant but I can still give you a basic listen (lesson) in accounting." Oops. I apologize for all the spelling and grammatical errors. I'm sure there are a few more...just ignore them. Thanks ;-) Eric

To: Eric Yang who wrote (14174)	5/30/1998 11:20:00 PM
From: eric siegel	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 213177

Excuse me,Eric but I haven't seen any bearish posts for a long while.It would be more interesting if the bears chimed in occasionally.We're in a tight trading range here,25-31 or so for awile.I think AAPL might be immune to an impending melt down.This bull is very tired.Bells are ringing all over the place,the mantra of "buy the dips"is a bull trap.I had a target of 9250 for the short term top but came up 40 or so pts short.Steve's real smart,MSFT's woes are great for Apple. Regards, Eric

To: Eric Yang who wrote (14174)	5/31/1998 10:23:00 AM
From: soup	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 213177

Yes, and it's exactly that attitude that got Peter Parker's Uncle Ned killed! He was off jerking around in his Spiderman suit instead of catching the bad guy who wound up doing Uncle Ned in. And then he had to spend many guilty years taking care of his widowed Aunt May. Is this how you want to end up? soup >I find it annoying that over 80% of the time I spent on this thread goes towards correcting misinformation dished out by these bears. I ask myself "What the hell for?" Are they ever going to get it? No! Will they ever invest in AAPL. No! Their reason for being on this thread often seems to be for entertainment purposes only. Well...not at my expense.<

To: Eric Yang who wrote (14174)	5/31/1998 10:31:00 AM
From: soup	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 213177

Market Maker/Cardshark. (cribbed from SI/$5 and Under 5/28/98) Message 4630615 >First let me say that I am a shareholder [TGSK] with purchases between $1.66 and $2.18. This is my first post on this board though I have been monitoring it for about a week. I was a OTC MM for about 10 years ending in the late 80's. Since then I have been strictly an investor. Since I have not been that up to date in MM rules I will only make statements that I feel fairly confident are still accurate regarding these activities. I purchased my first TGSK a couple of weeks ago even before I knew of this Boards existance. I did it based stricly on the earnings announcement and press releases put out by the Company. In other words on fundementals. I will continue purchasing it for this reason. I rarely buy stocks that are not reporting since I do spend a lot of time researching the Edgar filings. However since this was a recent RTO I have relied on the Company's statements to date. I understand the 10K has been filed and look forward to seeing it. But frankly, due to the fact that I don't think the President wants to go to jail based on his very positive PR's I will take him at his word at this time that this is a very undervalued Company. I guess the primary thing that has me confused is why he left so many shares out with the public when he rolled up his very real Company. But I am willing to surrender this thought to his lack of knowledge of how to do an RTO. And the fact that some promoter "put the pants" on him. If he knew what he was doing he probably could have ended up with over 95% of a fully reporting shell. I don't mention this as a negative regarding his ability to run and grow a very successful Company in an Industry that he obviously knows well. The positive side of this point is that he certainly has given an opportunity for astute investors to participate cheaply in his many years of hard labor. For this I thank him. Regarding the alleged "short position". I am not going to get caught up in the discussion as to wether there is or is not a significant short here though I have to admit It is very abnormal for a stock with only a few million share float to trade the type of volume it has been trading for the last few weeks. What I would like to say is certain opinions I have putting on my MM hat as to why (if there is) a short may have materialized. By and large most MM don't have a clue nor do they care to learn, about the fundamentals of the stocks they trade. They just try to make orderly markets. When dealing with BB stocks it is very easy for a MM to get trapped into being short in dealing in a fast moving market. Reason being; most of the MM's in this stock are what are called "wholesalers" this means they don't have retail brokers "working" the stocks. So they have to rely on whats know as the "call" from larger retail houses. If a "Big" retail firm like an E-trade calls up a market maker to purchase say 5,000 shares of a stock, they expect to get an "execution" from that market maker. If he turns them down, or only gives a partial then the "Big" firm will go to another MM. If this second MM "fills the order" then that "Big" firm has a moral obligation to continue to give future "business" in that stock to that MM who preformed (his life blood). This will go on until he "fails" to perform and so on. Contrary to popular opinion the "Big" firms Do NOT neccessarly go to the "Low Offer" to fill a buy order (Or high bid for a sell). The "Go" to who they think will perform to fill the order and expect that MM to "match" the "low offer" in the case of a buy (bid in the case of a sell). Even though this MM might in fact be the "high bid" and not really want to sell any more. As a wholsaler he must perform or he will get a reputation as a "non-performer" with the "Big" houses and will cease getting "calls" which means he will soon go out of business. I mentioned above that this activity is very significant to BB stocks. I say this because most of the trades in these BB stocks are "unsolicited" and are done through discount houses, ergo "Big" firms. With the above groundwork layed, let me try to explain how market makers get short even if they like the Company; Lets say that a stock (shell) has been lying quitely at $.25 bid $.50 offered. A limit order comes into one of the MM's to Buy at $.50 for a thousand shares. Prior to this trade that MM may be "flat" (neither long or short any shares). He fill the order and is now short 1,000 shares. He may raise his bid hoping to find a seller to "flatten" out his position. But before he realizes it a wave of buyers have come in and cleared out all the $.50 offers. Now the stock is $.50 bid .75 offered. Here comes that "Big" firm he just sold the 1,000 shares to at .50 with another bid for 1000 at .75. He makes this print. Now he is short 2,000 at an average of .625. The market keeps moving and now its .75 bid 1.00 offered. Now he has to make a decision. Just like investors, MM Hate to take a loss. So 9 times out of 10 he will now sell 2000 at 1.00 making him short 4000 but with an average .81. At this time he would love to see a seller at .75 so he can cover his short and make a few bucks. But instead the market keeps moving up. Now it is 1.00 to 1.25 and here comes the buyer again at 1.25. He doesn't want to loose the call so now he needs to sell 4,000 at 1.25 to keep his break even point above the bid. Now he is short 8,000. Market moves up to 1.25 bid 1.50 offer here comes the buyer now he feels he must sell 8000 here because "stocks don't go up forever". Now he is short 16,000. And so on and so on. If the stock keeps moving up, before he realizes it he could be short 50 or 100 shares (depending how big his bank is). Finally the market closes for the day and on paper he may look allright in that his "break even" price may be around the closing price. But now he has to figure out how to entice sellers so he can cover this short. It is important to note that if this happened to one MM it has probably happened to most all of them. Some ways MM's entice sellers; Run the stock up with a "tight spead" in a fast market, then "open" up the spread to slow down the buying interest. After it has "cooled off" for a little while lower the offer below the last trade right after a small piece trades on the offer then tighten the spread so that the sellers feel they can take a "quick profit" by "hitting the bid" on the tight spread. Once the selling starts the MM's will walk it down quickly by only making small prints on the way down with the tight spread. Another way is by running the stock up in the morning, averaging up their short then use the above technique to walk it down in the afternoon. Hopefully after doing this for several days, it will demoralize the buyers. The volume will dry up and the sellers will materialize thinking that the game is over. Contrary to popular opinion, MM usually Do Not Cover in Fast moving markets either Up or Down if they are short. They Short More. They usually try to cover after the frenzy is out of the market. There are many other techniques they use but the above are the most popular. This technique works about 9 times out of 10 particulary in a BB market. However that is because 9 out of 10 BB stocks are BS. Remember what I said above. Most MM's don't have a clue as to the value of a Company until they get trapped. If the Company has solid fundementals and a bright future. Then the stock will do very well. And the activity that caused the situation will prove to even help the future stock activity because it created an audience. Pistol Pete< -------------------------- Under the heading of "Sympathy for the Devil", I once read a book about short-selling called "When Stocks Crash Nicely" (can't remember author/publisher.) and I thought that was scary. soup

To: Eric Yang who wrote (14174)	5/31/1998 12:03:00 PM
From: Sam Scrutchins	Respond to of 213177

Eric, I'm sorry that you believe you are wasting your time on this thread responding to and trying to correct misinformation posted by others. I believe, and I think many others do as well, that your posts have provided some of the best and most accurate fundamental information about Apple that is available to small investors like myself. It would be a great loss to this thread if you were to leave. One suggestion is that you occasionally post your revenue and expense projections and leave it to the rest of us to battle the merits of the post. We are good at that, and the process of matching wits with one another is one of the main reasons we are around. You do not have to be involved in this process. At the same time, I hope that you find some value in reading the posts on this thread. You probably do not have time to find nor access to all stories or other salient points that are provided here. In effect, it is like a news group with each participant providing a few strands of useful (sometimes useless) information. It is the little nuggets of gold that appear from time-to-time that help all of us make better decisions about our positions. These nuggets may be fundamental, they may be technical, or they may simply be someone's predictions (AND THE REASONS FOR THEM--NOT LIKE ANDON) that help others of us to see something we could not see before. Again Eric, your contributions are very valuable and we do not wish to lose them. At the same time, allow others to do the same. If you think some of our posts have no value, then ignore them. If you think some are providing misinformation, then it is your choice whether to respond with a correction. Most of us can judge the merits of the posts made by others, bulls and bears alike. Stay with us, Sam

To: Eric Yang who wrote (14174)	5/31/1998 7:15:00 PM
From: Alomex	Respond to of 213177

They jump into conclusion without thoroughly examining the facts or doing the necessarily research. This is a cheap shot. Dozens of bulls here hadn't even looked at the 10Q filling, but somehow I'm the one who doesn't do enough research. PS. The bears on this thread are generally ill informed and don't do enough research to support their statements. Bulls*t. Apple bulls here are the most likely to make overly optimistic statements that are not founded on reality. I invite you to go back and re-read all the cheerleading statements from Apple bulls about Exponential, Copland, Apple's stock price, Jobs becoming a CEO, revenues, e-mate, newton, Mac-OS, Rhapsodhy and see who routinely makes ill-informed statements. But somehow in Eric's view a discussion on the fine points of the 10Q is "ill informed", while he conveniently glosses over all others. I find it annoying that over 80% of the time I spent on this thread goes towards correcting misinformation dished out by these bears.* I find it even more annoying that over 90% of the bullish statements in the history of this thread proved out wrong, yet they keep unabated. Never pausing for an extra minute of thought or reflection. I ask myself "What the hell for?" Are they ever going to get it? No! Will they ever invest in AAPL. No! I invested in Apple and made money. That fact alone puts me ahead of about 50% of the people in this thread who are still underwater. I think truth is Eric is tired of defending a company which is in a precarious situation. He wishes, for his own piece of mind, that Apple was a Cisco story, where you could buy the stock and sit alongside and admire the chart. The fact that I routinely point out hazards ahead distresses him, and so he comes and bitches with this rant about ill informed bears which only exist in his imagination.