Inconclusive evidence?
Two examples:
CXTI (inconclusive)
I have no doubt at some blog thread here, at rb, or somewhere, one could easily find some lingering bagholder (or two) to argue the point that CXTI numbers are valid and the company is simply entertaining a normal extended quiet period waiting to blast out upcoming rocket ship news, lol.
ENRON (conclusive)
Hard to find anyone to argue enron wasn't a scam.
Conclusion: Stocks/Stock trading is best approached in correct anticipation of a host of imperfect inconclusive evidence, NOT conclusive evidence. Of 10,000+ stocks to choose from, one might get to witness "conclusive" evidence once per year.
There's alot of distribution abuse UNDERNEATH all these china r/m chop suey numbers that HAS NOT been being posted/discussed at VMC often enough. Yes, the adept traders will exit unscathed, but consequently will newby readers hold their bags and possibly at the expense of being bamboozled by VMC posting all these brilliant chop suey numbers and ignoring so many faults?
Would you be willing to change the VMC title sentence to:
Value Microcaps is dedicated to finding (and flipping) profitable, low p/e, value stocks.
The VMC board has deteriorated somewhat from the excellent board I remember when I first stumbled onto it. Maybe the chinas are ALL legit, every one? Any stance of "inconclusive evidence" cannot be argued, but the abundance of faults within the china r/m sector should be discussed more often and more openly for the good of ALL readers, adept traders and newbys alike.
Constructive criticism & jmo
AI
Market Data 
Markets 
