>>When I say KKD has gone from 15 to 47 it's impressive but when I say it's gone from 60 to 188 anyone with a brain can see the shorts got roasted big time!! <<
no, anyone with a brain would see it's the exact same thing percentagewise either way, and that all you're trying to do it manipulate stupid newbies into thinking otherwise. You're a fraud.
<<When I say KKD has gone from 15 to 47 it's impressive but when I say it's gone from 60 to 188 anyone with a brain can see the shorts got roasted big time!! Going from 60 to 188 just has more pizazz if youask me!! >>
Anyone with a brain can do fractions Mike...only the unsosphisticated might fall for the pizazz.
(Will is short KKD)
I use this method because it shows much more clearly just what a winner KKD has been. When I say KKD has gone from 15 to 47 it's impressive but when I say it's gone from 60 to 188 anyone with a brain can see the shorts got roasted big time!! Going from 60 to 188 just has more pizazz if youask me!!
Your math skills are truly impressive, but tell me why companies even bother doing stock splits if all you do is go and unadjust the share prices? Also please show me even ONE other person on Wall Street who uses your method. Just one, that's all. Thanks in advance.
Dah - I'll explain it too you clearer seeing as how your in the federal prison and havn't actually ever invested any "real" money!! If the all time high is around 47 and it's had one two for one split then - unadjusted for that one two for one split - the price would be 94. If it's had two , two for one splits then the unadjusted price would be 188!! Starting to get it?? If you need further instruction please call anytime. I consider it my job to educate those of you who just don't get it!!
getting a tad desperate there, wouldn't you say, Mikey?
I look at a chart for 2002 and it looks to me like KKD is down about 20%. Sure wish I had been "dumb and uninformed" enough to short KKD at the end of December. Let me guess, Mikey, you were probably pimping it as a strong buy then too.
>>those who went short in Nov. of last year at 52 didn't lose any money on the move to 92 by late Dec. 2001<<
Earth to Mikey: You're making up those numbers. KKD all-time high is 46.90. And don't give me your bull
>>Keep in Mind that in a margin account if you short a stock at 50 and it goes to 75 you are wiped out!!! <<
how many times has it happened to you, Mr. Momo?
>>KKD has been wiping out the shorts for a long time now!!! <<
What's "a long time" -- a year? Someone who shorted KKD a year ago would be at break-even now. Someone who shorted it in mid-June 2001 on its climax run to 43.50 would be up > 10%, which ain't bad, all things considered. And there were plenty of other points along the way where someone could have shorted in the 40s and they wouldn't exactly be "wiped out" now.
Someone please get a crane to pull Mikey's head out of his ass.
Nope, I didn't say that and challenge you to show where I did. I said that somebody who shorted in early April last year lost a lot of money by the end of May of last year, AND VIRTUALLY NONE SINCE!
As far as your assumptions that whoever is short has no capaicty to carry the margin, isn't that proven wrong by the fact -that you tout- that KKD has so many shorts? How can all theseshorts be out there if nobody can carry a short? An investor has made nothing either way in the last year. Traders could have made money in either direction.
Nothing you say is going to change that.
>>>So a huge rise followed by a status quo performance is considered bad eh?>>>
Nice try. A huge rise followed by twelve months of status quo is only good for those who were in more than twelve months ago. Somebody who bought a year ago hasn't done well.