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: Russian Bear who wrote (23783)	8/2/1998 10:31:00 AM
From: Wallace Rivers	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 32384

OT again: I admit guilt in posts which stray from the subject (that seems the norm, and becomes more and more the norm as we hover near a 52 week low). I sincerely hope that those who present the bull case for LGND are correct IN THE LONG TERM. The bulls have been wrong since I purchased the stock, and I feel the references to "big boys coming in", preopen bids/asks and transactions, number of hits to websites, have thus far been irrelevant and a negative leading indicator. And they are IMHO unnecessary cheerleading and touting of the stock. This is a HIGHLY speculative stock, and posts such as those mentioned which might sway investors are not needed in the business of making an investment decision based on hard fact.

To: Russian Bear who wrote (23783)	8/2/1998 2:45:00 PM
From: RXGOLF	Respond to of 32384

<<The only well-reasoned criticism of Ligand that has appeared on this thread in my recent (admittedly failing) memory is that which was offered by Richard Harmon. I found it quite valuable to reason through his perspective. It is also hard to argue with the brute force numbers that Peter Portlas has been throwing around recently >> RB, I agree with you whole heartedly, and I believe you will find little valid criticism, if any to Richard or Peters' post. The longs and shorts may both benefit from post such as those you have mentioned. Few of us here are present for any reason other than to make a few(or preferably a lot)of bucks, and if we can be enlightened to the possibility of LGND moving down, many here would be pleased to make some on the short side, before cashing in on the long side!! I'm sure the MM's are making it both ways, and I would love to do the same. I just fail to see how beneficial a constant negative connotation can be, whether it is applied to the short or long argument made for a security. Anyway, I am with you Big Bear :-), and here is to keeping up with the Big Dogs, Greg