Barron's pisses me off. Mind you I don't have a problem with a negative view on my holdings. I welcome an alternative opinion. But when a shortseller bends the ear of a reporter to make a case for selling, I have to wonder if it isn't a frustrated short seller trying to unload a position that's moved nowhere. I knew margins would be pressured by higher commodity prices when I bought CAKE. I knew some analysts were predicting the growth rate would slow. Well, of course, it's going to slow! They've already got 80 locations, some of which can hold up to 450 people. Tell me how many restaurants can pull that off and grow like weeds. It's a fundamentally good company with ZERO debt that will grow in the high teens to low 20s for the next three to five years. And those restaurants will stayed packed, even considering the dip in retail spending. The information cited in the article is old news. It should theoretically be priced into the stock (we'll see how that theory works Tuesday). The main point here is that growth is sustainable. The stock price will appreciate over the long run. It won't appreciate quite as fast as it did before, but is that a reason to pummel a good company? In fact, I will probably buy a few more shares on the sell off. It just annoys me that there are so many dishonest people out there looking to plant information. You see none of the problems in CAKE that have plagued so many other stocks like KKD. In the long run, good business reporting will help keep companies honest, the public will regain confidence in the stock market and we'll all make money. But those reporters should ask a few more questions like, "How much money have you made since you initiated your short position? How much do you anticipate making as a result of a high-profile article?" I'm sure the shortselling clown who fed that story to the press had the money all figured out.