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.

Biotech / Medical : VVUS: VIVUS INC. (NASDAQ) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: alan laValley who wrote (8781)	5/31/1998 10:49:00 PM
From: VLAD	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 23519

al, I would like to respond to a few of your points: 2)"those that short stocks are no fools playing a very dangerous game" Don't be so sure. I feel that the significant increase in shares shorted was not institutional. Why? I believe that many of the little fish have added to the short position assuming that the prior 10 million shorts knew something we don't when in fact most of the shares shorted are hedged against long positions--so the institutions don't really care about fundamentals on this stock but only on price direction. Personally, in the last 6 months I have lost over $75,000.00 shorting stocks with high short interest that ran up for no fundamental reasons. 3)"my emotions may have clouded my judgement" Yes, greed drove the price above 40 and now fear puts us below 10. 5)A 2Q loss is already estimated at -.15. Lawsuit expenses are covered by insurance. If you want a few case histories of lawsuits where the company was guilty as sin and settled I will be happy to provide them--insurance always covered the costs involved. 6)When you are in bed with the FDA you get your way. Kind of like why everyone hates the bosses girlfriend when she works for him. She can do no wrong since she provides the boss with "extra" favors. Don't get mixed up as to who the boss is between Pfizer and the FDA (hint: its not the FDA). Did you notice last week how Pfizer was the one that responded to the situation regarding the 6 deaths yet nothing was announced by the FDA? Just goes to show you who is really running the show. 7)This very point you make supports the point I make in your second point. Even the company itself thought that an average price of $14.50 per share was a good deal on the open market. Wouldn't you agree that the company itself knows more about the inside workings than the shorts? How many vivus longs are disappointed at Fridays close price? I would say all of them unless they paid less than $9.00/share.

To: alan laValley who wrote (8781)	5/31/1998 11:50:00 PM
From: VLAD	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 23519

al, To expound a little on point number six. I was sitting here with the computer and TV on and suddenly hear a report about Viagra on News Center 5 in Chicago. The report goes as follows: Another Viagra death is reported in a Tinley Park man. 58 year old (not an old man, sailor) Christian Bartolli reportedly died suddenly while on Viagra for the past month. Bartolli's family claims that the Viagra was responsible for his death as he was in excellent health and not overweight. Pfizer claims that he had a bad heart and it wasn't Viagra's fault. Of course there was no mention of what the FDA had to say about this situation--evidently Pfizer speaks for the FDA. All the Pfizer longs have been explaining that the 6 guys who died were not statistically significant and that they were all old men in poor health. Oh and I forgot the other important point that even aspirin kills people by inducing deathly ulcers. Now let's tell that to the brothers, sisters, wives and children of the victims. These guys took a non medically necessary drug approved by Pfizer's little helper so of course everything is A OK. Apparently the family of this victim will sue Pfizer--I guess if the FDA won't protect you then maybe your lawyer can.