SI
SI
discoversearch

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.
Technology Stocks : CyberGuard Corp. (CYBG) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: CMason who wrote (2024)8/25/1998 12:19:00 AM
From: Terry Menia  Read Replies (3) | Respond to of 2616
 
I won't spend any time kissing Bill's ass as he's probably so sore from all that he's gotten today he needs some recovery time. Bill - you were right, we were wrong, lets leave it at that.
Comment for CMason though -
Talk about DD? Two other friends and I did a LOT of DD on this company. We checked the products with users, we called Carberry religiously (I talked with him for at least an hour each time). We knew the right people, etc. Still, after all this info gathering, you could either make a strong case FOR or AGAINST the company. I choose the FOR position based on strong info that they would be bought out (and I'm not just talking about a rumor from granny). Obviously, this never came to pass, even though I think they were very close to cutting a deal when the stock ran to 18.
So, even with all the info we had you either had to be an employee, an auditor OR had some inside information - which one are you? I submit you can do all the DD in the world and at the end of the day you really don't know what's going on with a company unless you have one of the aforementioned edges. I'm curious to know what sources led you to go short - how did you have info that we did not? If you're in the business, know a market maker, know someone on the board, etc. then I can understand how you were smarter than the longs - would be interested in your story to gain perspective.
One other thing - I reviewed 10 of Wexlers picks on his thread and found eight of those to be losers (stock went up in value). Isn't hard to pick one loser in a stable of ten, don't you think? Comments welcome as I think you have the most level head of the shorts.
Curious - did you start as a long and switch over to pure shorting - or do you go both ways?
For the remaining longs, a few comments:
1) Forget the lawsuits - you'll just be making some Palo Alto or So. Florida bankruptcy attorney fat. I've been through two as follows:
Tandon Corp - 1985 - floppy disk drive business, very volatile - mgt lied to investors, was inept in the business, etc. - took two years to settle our class action suit - we investors made .05 on every dollar.
Seagate Corp - 1988 - again very volatile business - after a disastrous Q investors decided Al Shugart needed to be strung up - class action suit netted me .15 on each dollar (a huge sum in these types of cases!!!). My advice - don't file a suit. Company will tie up too much capital that should be going into improving the NT firewall vs. some dickhead lawyers pocket. Don't let your emotions get to you - forget the suit.
2) I plan to sell my balance this week if I can get 2. I still think there's some value here but plan to wait until the margin calls are out of the way (by Friday) and for the panic to subside. We also need to see what's going to happen with Carberry's replacement. The stock may get delisted and may be a good buy at much lower prices - need to wait to see how things shape up.
3) I've seen worse stocks hang in the 2 - 5 range and trade there so there may be a chance for some nimble traders to get some of their $$ back. But this will be tricky at best.
4) There were many signposts that we ignored along the way. Hope we've learned something from all this.



To: CMason who wrote (2024)8/25/1998 1:16:00 AM
From: uu  Read Replies (2) | Respond to of 2616
 
CMason:

I just love it when people like you come out and give their advise to people like David (and I and other longs who have lost a great deal on a particular moment in time). It just amazes me how someone like you can claim to be smarter than the rest just because he happened to be lucky (and I say lucky as I will explain why) in one particular stock at a particular moment in time!

You say to David:

> Good stocks don't need to be sold. It sounds like you bought someone's advice hook, line, and sinker.

If you tell me or anyone that the reason you shorted the stock was purely based on your research analysis of the company I say Bull Sh*t! Your research would have been as good as those who decided to take a long poisition in the stock. Please go ahead and give me your strong reason as why you decided to take a short position on the stock, and please be specific with regard to the fundamental data and your so called analysis (rather than babble talk like Wexler used to do that well this company is just a fraud without giving a solid hard core reason for it)!! I really would like to know what fundamental data you saw that caused you to take a short position in the stock. Please tell us the reason for your brilliant self claimed investment decision.

You tell David the following:

> I would submit that luck is always a factor, but most of the people I know who were "lucky" in the market also spent lots of time analyzing stocks, had an objective attitude, and were willing to take small losses when they realized they were wrong, to avoid big losses not too much later. How do these talents map against your skill set?

And I submit to you how do "YOU" map your skill set against the gurus of the market?! From the sound of it you claim to be an absolute guru because after all you are sparing the rest of us with your vast knowledge of the market (and in particular this stock)!!

The fact is my friend, you can not possibly make a case against CYBG given the data available to everyone by the company just a few short months ago. There is absolutely no way you can claim you knew this was going to happen. Based on what data did you make your decision to short the stock?! Or perhaps it was purely based on the advice you got from another self claimed guru like Wexler?!

I hope you do not take me wrong in any way. I just found it very strange when a stock crumbles (as the case is with CYBG) all those who shrted the stock come out and try to be a bunch of wise ass giving advise to the longs who have lost! But I guess longs do a similar thing to shorts, so like they say what goes around comes around!

Stocks do go down. As investors (either short or long) we all come to experience the joy of winning and agony of defeat. No one, and let me be specific on this absolutely no one can claim they always are big winners (the way you and Wexlers of the world regretfully attempt to imply). I have lost and gained a lot over the past many years of investing, and will continue to do so for as long as I live. However if one thing I have learned after so many years of investing is to be humble. Life will continue and it is an evolutionay process toward the better. The road of life is bumpy but I have learned only those who are humble will achieve the ultimate success, and those who are not may gain in the very short term but will never reach the absolute success. And Believe me I know this as I used to be driven strictly by my ego rather than modesty. Take my word my friend and take it for what is its worth, be humble, and be wise.

One's loss in a stock does not make him/her an ill minded individual as you seem to imply to David and the rest of us who at this time have lost. A coin has 2 faces. When you toss it up, sometimes it lands on its tail and some other times it lands on its head. There is absolutely no way you can claim to be able to toss the coin in such a manner that it will always (or for that matter most times) land on one side and not the other. We as longs did our best analysis of the company based on the data that had been made public to which we trusted. Based on that data the stock had a great potential to appreciate much higher than what we paid for. Like I said in my previous post it is absolutely unfair for the company to make invalid and wrongful data to the investors, and there is absolutely (and let me be specific on this absolutely no way) you or Wexlers of the world would have known the data was bogus unless you worked for the auditing company, or were a dominant insider.

I do congratulate you for winning in this particular stock at this particular moment in time. And whatever reasons you chosed to base your decision to short the stock (whether it was the psychic hot line, Wexler's 6th sense, the stars, or whatever), the bottom line is if you did in fact shorted the stock at $11 or better yet at $24 and covered today under $2 you did make a significant profit. My sincere congratulations to you and may your next investment experience be as successful as this one.

Regards,

Addi Jamshidi