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 : CAVALRY'S SHORT BUSTERS - MAGIC EIGHTBALLS PICKS -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Janice Shell who wrote (191)	9/11/1998 8:17:00 PM
From: Cavalry	Respond to of 1637

well janice glad you are saving the world from hypesters i can sleep without locking my doors now i guess, who protects the word from authors of art books who pretend to be stock gurus. AZNT WAS AT 83 CENTS 2 WEEKS AGO I SAID BUY YOU SAID DONT IT'S A SCAM WELL IF SOMEONE BOUGHT 5000 SHARES WHEN I POSTED ABOUT AZNT THEY WOULD HAVE PAID 4200 DOLLARS THEY COULD HAVE SOLD TODAY FOR $8650 A TWO WEEK PROFIT OF $4450. THAT IS A LOT OF MONEY FOR MOST PEOPLE A MAN COULD HAVE BOUGHT GROCERIES FOR A YEAR FOR HIS FAMILY WITH THAT MONEY. YOU KNOW LITTLE ABOUT INVESTING YOU COST PEOPLE A LOT OF MONEY IN AZNT YOU SHOULD BE ASHAMED YOU TOOK FOOD OFF PEOPLES TABLES WITH YOUR BASHING SHAME ON YOU JANICE Message 5553476 Message 5557418 cav

To: Janice Shell who wrote (191)	9/11/1998 8:21:00 PM
From: CrazyTrain	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 1637

<OFF TOPIC> again we are off of the real topic. Shorting would be fine IF it had some reasonable limitations needed in the BB arena. It is much harder to get away with it on the blue chip stocks, however it is a real problem in an OTC:BB issue. Especially when Marker Makers short a stock MORE than double the outstanding shares. It has the same "effect" to shareholders as if the company were printing extra shares. This is BAD FOR SHAREHOLDERS!!! Are you an MM or a Shareholder? IF you don't invest in BB stocks then you have no idea of how bad the problem really is. If shorting is a balance to hypsters (your words), then the only balance to excessive and unwarranted shorting is to squeeze. Especially in a penny stock when it is very difficult and time consuming to make an MM cover. The ONLY threat is that they might get caught in a short squeeze. Even then they can usually see it coming and still get out. Squeezing adds a necessary element of balance. Some MM's are guilty of shorting good BB companies without any real reason because they know they have the upper hand. You say that small BB companies who are just starting out deserve to be shorted. Don't you have any feelings for the investors who will lose money along with the company when the stock never goes up...even on a successful company after people have bought MORE than the outstanding shares of stock? With unlimited shares to sell why should MM's raise the ask? The fact that there are a lot of poorly run companies and scams is not the issue here on this thread. On this thread we are looking for companies that do not deserve to be shorted. You can shed a tear for the MM's if we are successful, but they need to be more responsible when choosing which stocks they short. The MM who covers their shares at the end of the day is not the one who will get squeezed. It's the MM who lets his naked shorts build over time. If MM's covered on a daily basis, then you would never see 4x the outstanding shares being traded and you (the shareholder) would see the proper supply and demand rule dictating your stock price (upward)! I am not opposed to shorting, nor am I challenging your right to short. So why would you challenge my right to hold the shares that I own so that they cannot be manipulated against me (that is all a short squeeze is). If your hand is not in my cookie jar then you have nothing to worry about when I slam the lid shut. (I think I'll take credit for that quote...I like it). MRF