Pump and Dump, Explained
Friday December 16, 10:03 am ET
By Motley Fool Staff
Pumping and dumping is the illegal act where someone buys shares in a company, hypes it to pump up the share price so that she profits, and then dumps her shares quickly, before they fall in value. Since this practice is usually done with small and volatile stocks, the pump-and-dumper's selling will likely contribute to the stock's rapid downfall.
This practice has flourished on the Internet, where unscrupulous folks have found it easy to pump up the stock prices of penny stocks. The SEC and others have gone after many pump-and-dumpers, so don't think of this as a new career possibility for yourself. (One famous case involved a 15-year-old.)
Our advice: Steer clear of penny stocks (those trading under $5 per share) and be wary of any hype that you might run across about small obscure companies you've never heard of.
I do pay attention to him. I'm having trouble getting anyone to present a case for VNX beyond general promises of good times to come.
While it's possible that VNX bulls are correct, I have found the possibility remote enough to have sold short 33,000 shares. Corticalchatter has over 100k+ shares, so he must believe in VNX with a fervor at least thrice that with which I disbelieve in it.
I guess I fell off your ignore list.
I would suspect their next material change is either profitability or bankruptcy, and we both know which of those two are most likely.
Are you kidding.If a VNX employee lost a quarter in the coke machine they would have a press release restating earnings guidance complete with another forward looking statement
Would you want to communicate about VNX and SHFL via a forum other than this site?
Bob send me your addy & i'll mail you a nice ouija board to communicate with.
Was gonna use it to communicate with my wife but the ground is frozen & i can't kill her till i can dig a hole.
Now i'm stuck buying Christmas presents for her..
That is probably a good assumption due to Reg FD which would require them to disclose any material change to their already precarious financial situation. This would be expected though. I would suspect their next material change is either profitability or bankruptcy, and we both know which of those two are most likely.
Since the last word on the $5 million loan deal was "The lenders have not indicated an intention to terminate the credit agreement on November 15th, but have requested that the Company extend the election date to December 1, 2005," in the 10-Q ( http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1004673/000114420405035305/v029205_10qsb.
htm ), I'll assume that it went through.