Replies to post #11765 on DD Support Board and Research Team

[Buckey]

exactly - Litigation Release No. 21053 was not today - it was Matts old one. Someone tried to be clever

[duke00324]

...impressive real-time DD there, nd...

...and I agree that these research companies, if they are trading the same companies that they report on, are acting in a manner which, although may not be illegal, is probably immoral and tends to taint their reputation as being objective reporters...

...keep up the good work...Duke...

[TheFinalCD]

check this $800K single PROMO out

http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=64453624

[janice shell]

It was indeed a hoax. Like you, I went to the SEC site and was briefly puzzled. I was also puzzled by the content, which didn't make any sense, really.

These people got it right pretty early in the day:

http://www.businessinsider.com/sec-charges-muddy-waters-and-carson-block-in-stock-market-manipulation-2011-6

I suspect the SEC will root out the perp quickly. It'll be interesting to see who it is. And although it doesn't seem to have affected trading in SNOFF, criminal stock manipulation charges could follow.

[TexasTea666]

Muddy Waters isn't the only player in that game right now. GEO Investing and Seeking Alpha are just as big on the short it and slam it.

[hedge_fun]

I love good research, but I don't really agree with the idea of profiting off of that research by buying and selling stocks in the companies you are researching and taking advantage of the price swings your research may help cause.

What would be the point of doing any research? That's what free markets allow, do they not?

Warren Buffet shouldn't even be allowed to SPEAK about any company he has interest in, using that rationale. Or any mutual fund shouldn't be allowed to PROFIT from their research, should they? At some point that info is made public, is it not? Folks want to follow success and BIG MONEY.....and in some cases do NO research, they just follow. They find out Buffet's in a stock, and they follow his lead.

Firms that do research and uncover fraud go and do site visits just like Buffet does before he invest. If they uncover FRAUD, why shouldn't they be allowed to PROFIT for their due diligence? If Buffet finds a GEM, then he does, right?

As soon as a story or filing hits showing Berkshire Hathaway invested in ABC stock, a bounce can soon follow IF it gets broadcast on CNBC, FOX Bidness, or made public in some other way.......all based on the DD/research done by Buffet's company. Should that info be kept quiet? It has moved markets before, right?

Research is not looking at filings and realizing OS are increased......but boarding a plane and/or putting boots on the ground because you suspect fraud, and seeking to uncover it. Do that and you put you own capital at risk, perhaps after initial findings lead to suspicions.

The idea that PROFIT from TRUTH is bad, and comparing it to P and D is by definition fraud. Here's a post you sould read about P and D.........it nails it pretty good imho. The post should be a sticky somewhere!

http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=60468372

I don't know how you could read that post and think REVEALING TRUTH and PROFITING is in some way the same.......

Doing research, putting your own money at risk, and REVEALING TRUTH, like firms such as Muddy Waters does, actually is Capitalism at it's best, imho. Profit from TRUTH, while risking your own money, is a far cry from a CEO paying a firm with shares he actually doesn't own, so he can PROFIT from hype and/or LIES.

I respectfully disagree with your comparision.......

Muddy Waters got it wrong last week, (apparently)......and unless they covered, some of their own capital that they put at risk is gone. Folks also get alerts from Muddy Waters. Those that do will be a little more careful next time if they believed the alert and blindly sold short.

The market has a way of correcting itself. I trust free markets and always will. Though not perfect, they are always CORRECTING themselves.

Honest shorts keep the markets honest.....and their efforts should be rewarded. Since shorting a stock is actually RISKIER by definition, with HIGHER requirements than going LONG, one would think a SHORT would actually do MORE research than a LONG in light of the risk involved. Why punish their efforts?

Let me preface this by saying that I don't agree with stock manipulation of any kind.

If it's TRUTH, how is that manipulation? You don't think all those Chinese RM stocks were on the up and up, do you?

gl