FAZ is a highly volatile, large cap index and Skins is a thinly traded OTC micro-cap. My only point was how different they are and how unusual it is to have only 2 stocks that are so vastly different.
As for your personal situation, all I'm suggesting is that your posts have been relatively enthusiastic for someone who was buying at much higher prices. I would have expected some disappointment in the company's performance and I haven't seen any. While I have no way of verifying anything anyone says on an anonymous MB and I certainly don't want to accuse anyone of anything untoward, there are many situations where someone who has been cheerleading a stock that is down significantly will suddenly explain their enthusiasm by saying, "I sold and rebought several times, so I'm up on the stock, even though its trended way down since I've been posting".
I took exception to your implication that I must think Skins is a good investment or I wouldn't be posting.
I guess the best approach is to stick with discussing the stock and not interpret each other's actions or statements.
Toward that end, I will go back to an earlier post in which you challenged my reliance on prior history as essentially "Skins is a start up and therefore history is not a valid indicator" (sorry to interpret, but you're welcome to correct me if that's not what you meant). I disagree because Skins has already spent $15 million and gone through at least one prior launch. They are also raising money that is extraordinarily expensive IMHO. So while they are not established as a brand, they are IMO far beyond the start-up stage and I think looking at history is the only valid approach. Even assuming success from a company that has already had it with one product is risky, but to assume success from a company that has yet to demonstrate it to me, is a foolhardy investment strategy.
Market Data 
Markets 
AI
