He must have been scared of the spiders in his room because nowhere at all in our email thread there was any reference mention or even indirect reference to physical harm -- with Spencer a bit of logic is enough to rub his nose to the ground because his intellectual powers are not that great. He might be good at hokey stick charts and writing about cars and satellite radio but when it comes to reasoning, boy oh boy.
For example, he wrote a list of reasons he thinks I lied. Of course none were lies as he has trouble understanding the difference between an opinion, an assumption, and a lie. One of the reasons was this: He wrote that his articles don't show up on Google finance and that my saying so was a lie. I sent him a screenshot of Google Finance which contained his article! Very unfortunate that he copied Ellie on this nonsense and rejected my call for peace by having a CALL not an email exchange.
But after rejecting my offer for a peace call and going endlessly blah blah with arguments that don't hold water, and #$%$ Ellie off by getting her engaged in this email change (he copied her in response to my email to him which I had NOT copied her but had asked her separately if she's willing to moderate a peace talk -- I have an email from him now that he wants to cooperate !
I think he's probably ashamed of me publishing his reasoning which is highly embarrassing to say the least. Things like the Google above -- or for example he said I lied because I reacted to his CR article having said I didn't read it. His argument has huge problems in two ways:
a) he intentionally left out the fact that I said I did read the title and the first paragraph which he links to CR
b) even if I had reacted without reading the article how would that make it a lie?
I wonder if he ever went to or graduated from university -- you never hear these kinds of arguments from university graduates(or even high school graduates -- some of his arguments would fail a 5th grader's logic)
LOL- that is indeed a bad joke but glad it's making you laugh- Not Wesley Day - not any of the other bozos who wrote in opposition to lorc and forced investigations and lengthy responses but one guy -- one of 10's of people who responded in support and whose response was addressed with a blanket answer. It took the DEA far longer time dealing with the monkey wrenches thrown by Wesley, others, crooks who used bad science to derail the process. But I guess part of moral decay is that truth is not important and you think by repeating the same falsehood it becomes true. In case you didn't know, now you know. I was responsible for my comments and ONLY my comments and had NOTHING to do with anybody else's comments although some psychopaths like to make up the lie that I orchestrated others to post -- I did NOT. And it's also fascinating that people like you never blame those who were actually responsible for the delay -- assuming there weren't others behind the scenes who were intentionally delaying things to make lorc hit the market at the slowest time of the year. We just don't know. What we do know is it too the DEA far far longer to respond to negative comments than positive ones.
Typing Correction :
"Spencer just told me that he owns 5% of ARNA"
"Spencer just told me 5% of his portfolio is invested in ARNA"
Anyway the rest of the post should have made it clear that that was a typing error and the bozo would have to file with the SEC anyway if he was a 5% owner of ARNA.
The original statement of his I read was ambiguous as to the timing of his disclosure and I wasn't about to go research over 800 blog posts and over 5000 comments to find out when he made that disclosure. Anyway, whether a few shares or a lot of shares (no idea what his portfolio size is), at least we know he has at least 10 shares (I assume his portfolio size is at least a 1000 dollars)! 1000 or 100 million doesn't change the fact that he's an idiot and I have a loooooooooong list of reasons what that is so.
Thanks for asking. I only posted this because he clarified his ambiguous statement about timing of his disclosure of his holding.
As for your other statements, you're entitled to your opinion about smarts. As for your comment about triggering a war with VVUS, you are wrong. First off my comments were a tiny fraction of total comments. Secondly, a tiny fraction can't possibly trigger a war with anybody. Thirdly, Wesley Day and those who posted numerous posts in opposition to Bel would have done it regardless of anybody making positive comments or not -- it was well planned for the last minute. Fourthly, the DEA spent the majority of time addressing the negative comments as it answered the positive comments in a brief categorical manner.
As for stock price, I never had a 2000 target.
As for being jealous, all I can say is, you must be kidding. I wouldn't want to be that bozo for a fraction of a second.
Spencer just told me that he owns 5% of ARNA. His past statement was ambiguous to me so I assumed his selling half of his holding took him down to 2.5% (there was no mention of 10% as a start) and I had not way of researching when he had done the disclosure. I don't read most of his blog posts and wasn't going to go through over 800 posts and 5000 comments to see if his 5% disclosure was last week or a year ago!
Just for the record since I last wrote I suspected he owns 2.5% based on his comment saying sold half.
5% of a 100k portfolio at the time of CR article makes it around 600 shares if I remember the price range correctly. A 500k portfolio makes it 3000 shares. Most people I know own a lot more shares but heck, to each his own.
I couldn't care less if he put out a blog post 5 times a day or once every 5 months. I try not to click on his blog posts because I find them redundant, boring, weak, at times harmful to Arena, insulting to and lacking journalistic integrity for reasons which I can outline (e.g. being verbose to just fill space when he's trying to make a whole blog post out of something very insignificant, censoring comments he disagrees with) -- but then again he does it as a hobby so that's not his profession, and as long as he has customers he'll keep putting out the same #$%$. He's not much worse than lollypop manufacturers, IMO -- they manufacture it because people buy it -- I don't buy them. So to each his own.
I think his objective is to pound out as many articles as he can without sounding too repetitive and ridiculous, to get as many clicks as he can get.
Keep in mind Monday after Thanksgiving many people are out (declared busiest travel day in LAX for example) - so I don't see the numbers being back to normal yet.
"DEEP CAPTURE THE STORY OF DENDREON" -- that was a major shame and corruption to the max.
"I stand by my original comments."
Whatever -- your original comments were around distribution -- you neglected the fact that it was his article which first put it on financial newswires. Whatever!
Whether his action was appropriate or not is a question of opinion. Whether it was in line with his supposed agenda or not is a different question and I have no interest in that.
You can always report things to the SEC that are suspicious yourself and not wait for others.
As for his holding. I always felt he has very few shares else he'd be an idiot to shoot himself in the foot.
I read somewhere he said he had 5% of his portfolio in Arena and sold half in the 10's if I remember correctly. 2.5% of 100k portfolio is like 400 shares -- 1/2 a mil $ portfolio it's like a whopping 2000 shares ! !
I know people who have or have had 10's and 100's of thousands of shares -- even a guy who owns over a million shares -- so a hundreds of shares in my book is few few shares.
To each his own.
You originally wrote:"As to his "publicizing" the article, that's just absurd. Consumer Reports has huge circulation; they don't need a mention in a Seeking Alpha article to get attention"
I explained: "Yes the #$%$report has their own distribution but his report very quickly after release of the #$%$ article hit the newswires and we know SA has good syndication -- so everywhere you could see that bashing headline because of Spencer Osborne: google finance, yahoo finance, etc. This is a fact."
Now you're talking about his hit piece was appropriate or not. That is purely a matter of opinion. You seem to think it was - I think it wasn't. I have no interest in shoving my throat down your throat but I am very clear that my thinking it was inappropriate had very good basis.
If you read my post carefully you'd see what I meant:
Spencer Osborne's Seeking Alpha article with a bashing heading quoting about that #$%$ article and a link to it put that #$%$ article on the financial newswires. Yes the #$%$report has their own distribution but his report very quickly after release of the #$%$ article hit the newswires and we know SA has good syndication -- so everywhere you could see that bashing headline because of Spencer Osborne: google finance, yahoo finance, etc. This is a fact.
On the other hand, I agree with you that to call him a criminal is not right unless he's a convicted criminal and I have not checked his record to know if he is or not and I don't think people should call him a criminal unless they have proof that he's a criminal.
"ozburne stated he is LONG ARNA "
ya how many shares? As I said before it takes 1 share to say you're long but he seems to have more - maybe 300 shares? He says he had 5% of his portfolio - and sold half - that's 2.5% of 100k - at today's price it's like 400 shares (guessing portf at 100k).
A whopping 400 shares?
at $500,000 portfolio that's 400 x 5 = wow! 2000 shares !!
he says he doesn't trade
and he calls his audience who he thinks are traders "investors" (LOL)
"Seems like people just assume its a hit piece because it's by Spenser"
That's a classic line. I wonder if he had anything to do with that !!
"I've never seen him do a negative piece on Arena"
Check out his hit piece putting the CR #$%$ report on the newswires -- and sent to 1000's of people. His article came out very quickly and got the CR #$%$ article a ton of publicity. And then that bozo tries to tell me his article was not negative. All I needed to read was the headline (extremely negative) and the first paragraph linking to an extremely negative article. I am not surprised so many call him a soft basher. But wait he says he sold 50% and is down to 2.5% of his portfolio if I remember correctly -- for a 100k portfolio that's around a whopping 300 shares of Arena at that time!
The guy is creepy!
Has he changed since then? Perhaps - but don't say he never bashed Arena - he's done a ton of bashing and I have a lot of examples.