InvestorsHub Logo

nyt

Followers 26
Posts 12945
Boards Moderated 0
Alias Born 01/29/2011

nyt

Re: Spec_Investor post# 7978

Friday, 10/11/2013 4:25:58 PM

Friday, October 11, 2013 4:25:58 PM

Post# of 132861
just because you say its so doesn't make it so. yes it could possibly be construed as manipulation, after all anything that anybody says anymore is often construed as such, even when it clearly is not. in this case, AS STATED...not in the narrow box of of what is allowed or acceptable, or pertains to details that obviously should not or cannot be divulged, it would be a far stretch to equate w/manipulation. and that's why you choose to note it as for purpose of raising the pps. what we are saying is that it is not desired for that purpose. you forget your own point.. that so many on this board keep forgetting...which is the SEPERATION of those who believe in the stock & the model as a whole, therefore not concerned much w/the games that jerk the price around daily or keep it down (such as myself)...from those who are more concerned about the daily pps. of course some (also myself) are concerned about both at the same time, for whatever reasons they might have, such as sometimes profit taking is necessary, above & beyond the desire to stay long. but none of above falls into any box that equates to manipulation. if the company simply informed, in this interim, that negotiations are still ongoing & in a positive manner, it would go miles to prop investors, even those that have near blind faith & if it happened to result in some price rise (who knows?), so what! its not manipulation.
Volume:
Day Range:
Bid:
Ask:
Last Trade Time:
Total Trades:
  • 1D
  • 1M
  • 3M
  • 6M
  • 1Y
  • 5Y
Recent VPLM News