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.

Non-Tech : Sungold Gaming International (SGGNF) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: KIWI who wrote (3213)	2/25/1999 6:03:00 PM
From: coach137	Respond to of 5164

I agree with you. While the price is 37 cents I'd be delighted to bail at $2 for my shares. Of course, when the price goes to $2 greed will kick in again, for me and many others, and we'll hold on. As well, many others, smart enough to buy a stock on the way will be buying then as well. So the $2 bid will reflect the market and the fundamentals (or hype). It won't be a dumping opportunity, except for a few.

To: KIWI who wrote (3213)	2/25/1999 7:48:00 PM
From: John Lawrence	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 5164

How many shorts? I don't know. This is a perennial topic. Kim says he is able to check somewhere to determine how many shorts are out there. I've heard his opinion corroborated by others who seem to know what they're talking about. I don't know enough about it to disagree with him. Those guys who pop up on this thread from time to time to run down the company also lead me to believe the shorts are just biding their time. If we accept that there is a large short position, my opinion, FWIW, is that there hasn't been enough volume at these prices for those guys to have covered, and I think they believe that they'll never have to cover. Keep in mind that the shorts were represented by the guys who voted against SGI on the VSE PLAC committee. Those guys figured they could shut the company down, but they couldn't. Now they're hoping none of the projects will be built. They're hoping they don't have to pay a cent to cover. They'll be wrong there too. IMO, before the ink dries on a lease with Interport or a deal in Michigan, we'll see the shorts covering. Some people believe the price will have to get up into the $4 range before the covering starts. One way or another, we should be able to tell, because when they cover, they tend to do it quickly.

To: KIWI who wrote (3213)	2/25/1999 9:47:00 PM
From: kidl	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 5164

FUN WITH “SHORT” NUMBERS … Assumptions: 1) Total current short positions: 2 to 2.5 Mil based on fairly recent company info and since no one can disprove, the number to use. 2) Double accounting of all trades on Nasdaq, thus posted volumes have been discounted by 50% for the purpose of this exercise. 3) 1 US$ = 1.50 Can$ Summary of Nasdaq trading activity: Total shares traded since Dec. 30, 1997 (257 trading days): 2,350,900 Shares traded at or below Can $ 3.00: 1,450,550 Shares traded at or below Can $ 2.25: 952,450 Shares traded at or below Can $ 1.50: 784,650 Shares traded at or below Can $ 0.50: 4,600 ERGO: The assumption that all short positions have been covered would mean that virtually all buying since Dec. 30, 1997 was done by shorts. Not possible since a very sizable number of shares was bought by myself or people I know. FACIT: The vast majority of shorts have not yet covered. Why would I make a statement like this? Simple … Because I spoke to one of them mid last year and was told that neither he nor his cohorts had any intention of covering until the shares hit Can $ 0.50. Have fun with the numbers and gear your trading accordingly. Regards kidl PS: Looks to me like you and your friends had ample opportunity to sell your l.….y (lovely, lousy, lonely … fill it in any way you wish) 35,000 shares well above your current wish price of US $ 1.00. PPS: How about a little less BS and a little more DD? Works wonders for your portfolio!