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 : Westfort Energy Ltd. (WT-T) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: bhg who wrote (814)	7/17/1998 5:25:00 PM
From: Tom Drolet	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 1288

Bruce: The Harvey Hutchins rebuttal is on post # 813. Save your fax paper. I hear that this Harvey is the same legal counsel that helped the Kennedy Admin. in the Mississippi Busing case of the 60's. Ah, how quality and commitment continue to show through. It makes for the most entertaining 8 page read I have had in many a year. I have this mental picture of a Southern Gentleman Lawyer (Colonel Sanders look alike), sitting on this verandah, drinking a mint Julep and being interviewed for his next book by John Gresham. Sorry for the Colonel Sanders bit-- if Robert Redford is more accurate-- then so be it. Anyway-- again-- way to go Harvey. Tom D.

To: bhg who wrote (814)	7/17/1998 11:42:00 PM
From: M. Merriam	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 1288

Bruce, I see you do not yet fully understand the errors in the story of the "take out". Today, you wrote: "The trader might sell some of their own shares to drive the price down and then execute the stop loss..." How shall I put this? Wrong! On the TSE, a trader (also known as a market maker or specialist) may never act to drive the price down. TSE regulations clearly state that traders are restricted from placing orders on their own account at below the previous trade. This protects Canadian investors from the type of abuse you described. I repeat, if I am a trader, and the last trade was (for example) at $2.10, I am only allowed to offer shares at $2.10 or higher. Even if the highest present bid is 2.05, I cannot sell shares, under any circumstances, at 2.05. I certainly cannot initiate selling at 2.05 and continue downwards until I hit the limit order at 2.00 and "take it out". And I certainly cannot collude with non-specialist private investors or brokerage houses to obtain the same effect. Bruce, I don't blame you for not knowing this because you appear to be new to the Canadian markets. However, whoever originated this story should have tried harder. I hope for all WT supporters here that it was not someone in Grant's office because (if my concerns are valid) not only would that be extremely dishonest and hurtful but, more importantly, it would only highlight their incompetence. And while, if I were a shareholder, I might be able to forgive a little dishonesty in a promoter (afterall, isn't that what makes for a good promotion?), it's the incompetence I would not be able to overlook. But then, does anyone here really think that this story could have originated in Grant's office given their impecable track record for reliable information (think shorts)? Bruce, if you still feel that this "taking out" has occurred, please let me know, and I'll forward the information to the TSE's surveillance department. Otherwise, I'm guessing that you'll denounce the story. Everyone here, please ask yourselves, where do you draw the line between fact and fiction in the WT story? Do you really believe that WT supporters are telling the truth and acting in your best interests? If you can't trust WT supporters on minor items (such as this trading story), then are you well advised to trust them when it comes to the important ones (such as the true costs of overcoming the salt problem)? And I'll repeat this bit of advise. If you are talking to a WT representative (or a representative of any company, for that matter) and you have even minor concerns about the veracity of their line, why not tape the conversation (where legal, which I believe is in most provinces). Just think of it as a bit of insurance. Radio Shack has inexpensive phone mics. If you have a problem with this, ask if you can record the conversation. Why should they object? Also, take dated notes, whether you tape or not. Just a word to the wise. Mike