Minutes ago cloudy_day_jane you posted..."It's already been proven that you are ibmwatcher "
What proof can you attach to any other alias that a different alias other than ibmwatcher is ibmwatcher? Are you willing to place significant money to have your so-called proof verified or discredited by Yahoo? If it's to be discredited...how much can you afford to lose? 2 questions that I should expect clarity from someone normal...but cloudy_day_jane is sub-normal.
Multi-alias list is a manifestation of your demented brain. My boss? Someone on that list has a boss, no doubt. I have none, you liar. Furthermore name this boss that you mention. TO KNOW SOMeone HAS A BOSS, YOU MUST KNOW THE NAME! You post garbage BS with the intention of being seen as believable. Quite the insurmountable undertaking, for the LIAR your are ibmwatcher!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
cloudy_day_jane, you refused to take me up on the proposition where Yahoo would prove to you that I am not ibmwatcher. You are every bit as much a liar as ibmwatcher. ibmwatcher refused to verify his list with Yahoo because it, like you, is dishonest info...a lie. You are despicable.
You are a liar and an idiot. Anyone that can find your original list...from what is it 6 years ago, let them. And your pump of MJNA from .30, lost more than half it's value.
Your intention is to connote that you were bored, I presume. You truly are a boring liar...and coward even when given 10 to one odds favoring your claim. I suppose if you had a mining claim that you knew you'd be making a 900% gain, you'd take a pass...and that equates to your dismissive tone to my proposition. Go take a nap, you loser/liar.
You are one simplistically foolish individual. Your lack of confidence is obvious. I am not ibmwatcher. It would be next to impossible that there's anyone stupid enough to believe you. Here's another proposition to counter or accept that I can't raise $100,000.00. Pick a number you can afford to lose....over $2,000.00. I'll open an account at a major bank that we can agree upon. When you find that new account with $100 grand verified, your number becomes my cash that you provide, loser. Be the liar and coward that ibmwatcher has trained you to be and refuse.
would be to shutter operations completely, restart when commodities regain upside momentum. In other words, conserve cash aggressively and renegotiate debt.
I know the answer...it'll be the same as if it were coming from ibmwatcher. cloudy_day_jane, I'll offer you the same 10 to 1 odds offered to and rejected by ibmwatcher. Your $10,000 at risk, but if you are correct (that I am also ibmwatcher) you will be paid $100,000. That's right you benefit $100,000 if, when we meet at Yahoo headquarters should they confirm that I am ibmwatcher. I also must compensate Yahoo for their time...or to be correct, loser pays. I won't lose. I predict that you will prove to be a liar and/or coward when I take your $10,000...or you simply do the expected. Much like ibmwatcher you will reject this proposition. By doing so it becomes obvious the lack of confidence you put to your own words.
" BTW QTWW at $3.40 is a buy and hold. Thank me later. "
Maybe...daveatmel likes gold more than QTWW, like birdcatty. So don't expect any forthcoming gratitude.
CNBS: A panel of 4 discussing stocks and 2 gave it a buy before earnings...no one suggests selling.
Another analyst came on and was bullish as well. Price target $22. Probably a year from now.
GTAT, RXPC, Spongetech, MJNA, Six Flags before they reissued new shares...surely there are others that ibmwatcher chose that cratered. What a guy !!!
I'm not hiding anything, you idiot. ibmwatcher began the lies years before you created your screen name, jerknugget. That poster and I are not the same individual and you can believe otherwise until the end of time for all I care and further prove your abject stupidity.
I agree with your overall point which is unprecedented time allocated for 1 stock. Icahn and Apple bulls infer that gadget tech has no ceiling. Icahn and Blockbuster, a huge failure, along with others.
Anyone big or small can be hugely wrong is my point.