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.

Strategies & Market Trends : Mr. Pink's Picks: selected event-driven value investments -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Dee Jay who wrote (2256)	8/28/1998 4:04:00 PM
From: Spunky Beaver	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 18998

You kind of remind me of a guy standing on the corner that happens to witness another person that sees a car that's about ready to run a red light and utters, "Oh god, a wreck" and thinks that the other guy caused the wreck to happen. Stick your head in the sand, dude. You'll be in China in no time.

To: Dee Jay who wrote (2256)	8/28/1998 4:18:00 PM
From: Michael Bakunin	Respond to of 18998

I like "potentially actionable". Regarding "if there is an intent to drive down the price that is patently illegal", cf the Wall Street Journal's opinion that "manipulation cases are tough to prove, and fraught with free-speech implications" and that "there is little law for people who are giving their own honest opinions." exchange2000.com It is my honest opinion that my cats are "potentially actionable", but they sure spend a lot of time sleeping. -g- Best of luck, mb

To: Dee Jay who wrote (2256)	8/28/1998 4:26:00 PM
From: Peter V	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 18998

Dee Jay A long says: management is great, financials are stellar, the products are good, the sales people are knocking on customer doors, and the outlook is rosy. Pink says: management stinks, the books look cooked, the sales people are looking for work, and products, schmoducts, the stock is headed for the crapper. Is one statement subject to SEC action and the other not? I don't think so. And even if one side or the other exaggerates, like saying salespeople are leaving in droves, it's an opinion, even if it is stated in such a manner that it sounds as if the poster knows it as a fact. Opinions are not actionable, and the SEC won't waste its time. Many people have threatened Bill Wexler with lawsuits and SEC investigation for his similar negative comments, yet I have not seen any to date. I think the SEC is much more concerned about long touting than short bashing. In either case, however, the intent of most posters is to drive the stock in the direction they want it to travel. Other than OTC:BB stocks, I can't believe that a single poster can have a significant effect on a stock, especially one that trades nearly half a million shares a day like MRVC. And most of the MRVC longs are saying that Pink has had nothing to do with the recent decline, that he just got lucky. You, OTOH, must be saying that Pink had a material effect on the stock price. Most of Pink's picks, including MRVC, have crashed due to significant internal problems that Pink has merely pointed out. In short, you are wasting your time. But hey, it's your time to waste, have at it.