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 : Ligand (LGND) Breakout! -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Rudy Saucillo who wrote (22749)	6/26/1998 5:09:00 PM
From: celeryroot.com	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 32384

" CIST is an extreme value play with an extraordinary patent position " Why don't you define for us what you mean by "extreme value play" ?? as far as, "extraordinary patent position" hmmmm not to many seem to agree since it sells for 19 cents, or could it be that the patent is useless

To: Rudy Saucillo who wrote (22749)	6/27/1998 12:42:00 AM
From: Flagrante Delictu	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 32384

Rick, OFF TOPIC. You recently began posting on the LGND thread with the obvious purpose of denigrating Michael Murphy without any proof of your claim that he has an "utter lack of credibility". It's a given in scientific discussions that when someone makes as sensational accusation as you did, that he would provide evidence to "prove" his allegation. When I noticed you had failed to do so, I decided to see what kind of stocks you chose to associate yourself with. I was underwhelmed, to say the least. Naturally enough, I had no reason to read the posts of someone who willingly chose to associate himself with one of the all-time lists of losers. So, I asked you to back up your allegation. You refused to do so, telling me that I could check it out in Hulbert's Digest, which you claim is a "respected publication". Why should I have to search out your "proofs"? What I was able to find out from Hulbert's Digest is that Murphy had the second best record of profitable picks from 1987 through 1996. That's proof enough for me to put the lie to your allegation that he has an "utter lack of credibility". By the way, I have noticed that the Oxford English Dictionary has a definition for "utter" as "indefinitely remote", which would seem to qualify your allegation as "sensational".