Replies to post #115531 on The Question and Answer Board (IHUB)

[Brad S]

I'm inclined to agree with you legal, offering to charge people more money to come out of the closet just doesn't seem like a good incentive to me.

[mimurray]

I see what you mean and that does present a problem. Personally, I don't have a problem AT ALL with promotional people that disclose. I have made some serious money playing some stocks that were being promoted.

The problem with this new system is how do you prove that they are being paid to promote a stock while offering no disclosure??

There would have to be some way to verify beyond a shadow of a doubt that someone is doing a paid promotion for a company and they are not disclosing. That would be hard to prove in my opinion.

It's too bad that those of you that do disclose get the bum rap that some folks dish out. As far as I'm concerned if you are upfront and disclose your status you have as much of a right to post as anyone else does. If they don't like what you are saying they don't have to read it.

[lucky, mydog]

legalegaltx, i agree. special fees, lists or threads for those willing to disclose will not benefit anyone. i know matt has thrown this topic over for discussion but i think the idea is untenable. i will however, send in my resume to head the new ihub/advfn department of investigations, because that's where this is going.

[Phoenix-Rising]

I thought the problem was the non-discloser. I have no problem with those who promote as long as they have a disclosure and its visible. My beef is with the non-disclosing pumptards.

Another can of Worms... What about CEO's pumping their own stocks... and what about those who are pumping because they recived the 504 offerings? Is that legal?

[Phoenix-Rising]

when the promotion is over do you go back to the original Ihub price and lose the IRP rating?


"Do unto others as you would have others do unto you."