% | $
Quotes you view appear here for quick access.

Nautilus Inc. Message Board

  • tech_geezer tech_geezer Jun 19, 2003 4:28 PM Flag

    something is up, maybe

    I have been following/in this stock since it was trading for few cents on the TSE and it has always been volatile but the trading the last couple of days has been unusual. Good volume but the size of the trades are also relatively large. I don't think it is due to "all of a sudden the market realizing the value of the company". It may indiacte that some large players/institutions are making some bets. Here are some totally uninformed guesses: (1) smart shorts are satisfied with their gains and getting out, (2) the company is ready to make some announcement (buyout, settelment, marketing agreement, etc) and some people know about it (3) some loaded dudes/entities are trying to get large positions in the company and perhaps even taking control of it (not insiders since those don't own much of the company). Ah well, we may soon find out, then again we may not and this thing is just market action at its extreme.

    SortNewest  |  Oldest  |  Most Replied Expand all replies
    • I hear you, tech_geezer. I was in solid-state and optical physics for some time. But we had a saying: "In God we trust, all others bring data." It's not that people deliberately falsify stuff. I think that's very rare. The problem is that verbal statements about facts just aren't very reliable.

      I'm not claiming that the Motely Fool made the mistake on purpose. I'm just saying that we all go out there with preconceptions. (Maybe more polite than 'hype' ... but when there's money involved I like the shorter word). We tend to react emotionally. Failing to check the facts lets the preconceptions show through.

      Seriously, if there were a "science market" where folks could bet (say) on the properties of various chemical compounds ... wouldn't it help to have real data from reference books?

      Wouldn't it be a bit dangerous to bet very much without checking the free on-line references?

    • {Yeah, I was afraid you might have run into the Motley Fool article. I don't mean to sound cynical, but my own rule is this: if it's not filed with the SEC, it's pure hype}

      Well, to be honest, I don't have the stomach to disect all the details presented in SEC filings (maybe I should if I want to be doing my own investing but since I am a scientist I invest in companies whose technology I understand well. Getting into NLS was pure luck which had made me large sums of money.) Regarding Motely fool, they tend ot have very straight and well informed writers but I think in this case, it was an honest mistake and it came out when everybody was piling **** on NLS.

    • tech_geezer:

      "(not insiders since those don't own much of the company)"

      Incorrect. Insiders own more than 10% of the company.

18.675-0.775(-3.98%)1:26 PMEDT