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: Wallace Rivers who wrote (24085)	8/6/1998 2:45:00 PM
From: bob zagorin	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 32384

if they (tony, fugazu, mudcat) collectively ever posted one cogent argument as to why lgnd was a bad investment i would agree with you. collectively, they have done nothing but repeat their mantra...henry (or bob, or andy etc.) is a jerk, the stock is bad..." the only coherent negative arguments i've heard so far have to do with dilution and they didn't come from that crew. they certainly didn't alert us to the allergan distribution (perhaps henry should have but that's water under the bridge) or the dumping of many biotechs by some fund managers. so far i see the correctness of their negativity as blind luck. and everyone knows that "even a blind pig finds an acorn once in a while"

To: Wallace Rivers who wrote (24085)	8/6/1998 2:54:00 PM
From: Henry Niman	Respond to of 32384

Wallace, The naysayers just talk about price and launch personal attacks. They lack substance and are full of nonsense. A good example is our famous naysayer predicting that yesterday would see the biggest point loss in history (if os fell, which they did) Message 5410132 and then complaining about my reference to Tuesday's losses as being the third largest point decline on the Dow and the second largest point decline of the NASDAQ (and on percentage terms they were the third and second largest losses in the 90's and LGND fell 1/4 point that day): messages.yahoo.com@m2.yahoo.com He could make an incorrect call and use the point (not percentage) decline in his dire prediction, but took exception here and on Yahoo (and who knows where else) to my post which merely indicated that LGND did fairly well considering the large decline across the board, including Biotechs, which I linked. Same nonsense on buying at lows. Since he likes LGND over LGNDW, its OK for him to bottom fish with LGND, but not OK for others to do the same with LGNDW (they are taking advantage of the poor souls that have margined and are forced to sell). These guys are soooooo transparent. They just want to clog up the thread with utter nonsense, over and over and over.

To: Wallace Rivers who wrote (24085)	8/6/1998 3:17:00 PM
From: tonyt	Respond to of 32384

>Rather, I am faulting him for harping on the "naysayers" posting >"nonsense", etc., etc., whereas said group is the counterbalancing >entity, and, to this point, the correct one. Well, don't hold your breath waiting for the 'yeasayers' to admit they were wrong. Its soooooooooooo much easier for them to continually try to discredit the correct position. --Tony.

To: Wallace Rivers who wrote (24085)	8/6/1998 3:18:00 PM
From: Machaon	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 32384

<< I am faulting him for harping on the "naysayers" posting "nonsense", >> Why do you prefer the posting of nonsense? Do you prefer negative posts without any factual basis? Is that your style? Do you turn a blind eye to the fact that tonyt doesn't like Henry, and is compulsively stalking him? You must really like negative posts that do not discuss the fundamentals. Remember, statements that you make concerning your support for empty, negative posts reflect on your character also.