Gregmal

Yup. Wife and I have already had these thoughts. Generally speaking, the types of jobs such as electricians, plumbers, nurses, etc, can made great livings while having mobility and a degree of independence. Without the $100k+ of government/parental assistance needed to become an accountant or similar desk jockey type job. My middle brother is a white coat doctor. He’s in his mid 30s. Has 6 figures of debt. Lives with mom and dad. Just wasted 10 years in the school and residency programs. All over, top to bottom, I’m seeing little evidence that there’s material value to the higher education system relative to what it costs.

Yup. When the liberals hand government more power, less freedoms for everyone is the result. I used to walk home from school. Now as a parent I have to arrive 45 minutes early just to get a parking spot and wait in line to sign out my kids.

You can very quickly get the the bottom of "intent" when you view trading records. For instance, Carston Block if he was covering Fairfax on its brief dip, following his own media blitz....anomaly? I doubt it. The lawyers wanna get us caught up in, "was the research right" or "what was the long term outcome"....you can clearly see intent by....when was the position put on, when was it closed, and what was done in between. With some of these guys theres a clear and deliberate pattern/organizational scheme to it.

I dunno how many people who Ive run into over the years who've had great laughter about his 3 step investing strategy...SCREAM publicly about a great sounding fundamental story 2) exit the position shortly thereafter even though virtually nothing has changed 3) claim he called it......

I think it just needs to come down to intent. This guys was clearly using the media to pump and dump. If his strategy didnt have anything to do with hoodwinking people, he wouldnt have needed to execute it the way he did. Its hardly an industry secret that everyone knew his research sucked and was fairly fictitious for one reason. $28 itself is arbitrary outside of the fact that he jawboned about $65-100 and said he wasnt selling and then sold for no reason, minutes later, seemingly just because....HE manipulated the market upward with his rhetoric. I agree on the evil tentacles of big government, but my issue is also how the lawyers and rich guys like this distort all of this with such legal arguments and technicalities. The 30,000 ft view is that this guy lied and colluded with others to move stock prices very temporarily so he could dump after pumping.

Like I’d have zero issue if this dirtbag kept to himself and sold at $28 after buying at $26. Or if he got on tv and said, I think it’s worth $100 but will sell at $28….but he deliberately chose to be dishonest and misleading in every aspect. If it’s at $26 and you’re willing to sell at $28…why even go public? Oh….because misleading people is the thesis…like taking candy from a baby.

I’m honestly at a loss for how to even respond to that. It’s always been known that it’s easy to get rich, especially on Wall Street, if you lack integrity/ethics. Relabeling it “risk management” or whatever doesn’t change that. Obviously people like Left are fine behaving like that. I’d love to see Buffett tweet about a stock and then sell it 3 minutes later and write in his annual letters about how “he prudently managed risk”, to the detriment of his inner scorecard and reputation, for a risk free 7.5%.

I dont see why there isnt middle ground. I agree no one should have to disclose their trading position, in a vacuum. Nobody should be bound by their own price target parameters either. What I have a hard time seeing, is how people dont seem to agree that the above can be true, while acknowledging the obvious issue of someone playing those cards, AFTER they sought out TV appearances and publicly trumpeted "their price targets and trading intentions" WHEN THEY WERENT REQUIRED TO EITHER! Is this really just a license to lie for profit? If this guy did these things, without going on TV or mouthing off publicly...Id say the charges are bogus. Thats the difference. No one forced him to perpetuate the fraud and lies he did. He chose to. Are we really gonna debate the absurdity of taking a position at $26, saying its worth $100 and that you won't sell til $65, and then selling moments later at $28? WTF???

This is pure legal BS(correct in terms of the letter of the law even)....if we translate this into layman's terms, its essentially..."he can say whatever he wants and trade against the same stuff he is saying because its not illegal" and "the law doesnt require him to be honest". If we want to defend publicly shouting that a $26 stock is worth $65/100 and then validate the guy selling at $28 moments later despite ZERO fundamental events occurring, while same weasel is laughing to his peers about it being easier than "taking candy from a baby"...because of "first amendment" and "technicalities" that dont consider ethics...be my guest. This is total scumbag behavior.

The statements from his lawyer are amazing. Tells you all you really need to know...its basically "well, theres nothing that legally requires him to be honest"....fucking weasel in a suit.

That’s not the point though. Financial professionals have very specific rules regarding conduct and disclosure when dealing with the public. Has nothing to do with their clients or fiduciary responsibility.

Like don’t financial advisors have these exact sort of rules about things like communications with the public, social media usage, advertising, etc? Yet these unregistered hedge fund types get to skirt the spirit of all these rules?

Free speech is fine, going on a public platform to peddle a scheme is different. I don’t think it’s crazy to say, IF YOU choose to go on some public platform, you have a different set of rules

I still don’t get why we are overlooking the simple fact that no one is forcing anyone to go on TV or start mouthing off on Twitter….if you choose to, shouldn’t there be a higher standard for at least not being a total liar than if you don’t?

Not even that, it’s just that JOE is doing everything right, and there’s nothing PCYO or TRC offer that JOE doesn’t provide in spades. JOE I wouldnt be selling at $125-150. PCYO like in the past I’d flip at $14-15 in a heartbeat and TRC $22-25….so I’d rather just consolidate and diversify into other ideas which are beginning to emerge.

Can we simplify then? How bout, dont transact for 3 days before or after going on TV or social media? Especially against your public campaign? Or simply, stay off TV and social media if all youre gonna do is hawk shoddy investments? For all the bs Bill Ackman gets, I dont see him dumping the same day he's doing promos.... Acting like these people have a god given right to go use the media to move their holdings just for the sake of allowing them to dump into that is crazy to me. NO integrity.

JOE

Cleared out a bunch of PCYO, TRC, MMM, ALEX

Like oh poor baby. How awful that he was put at gunpoint and forced to go on TV and Twitter and make all these claims….half these guys ask to go on TV specifically to talk up their “new idea”.

It’s not hard at all! LOL when you take an option position or a substantial equity position, then publicly promote your position, especially with a price target, and then monetize that position on no fundamental change to the thesis, that’s pretty fuckin easy and clear. Is something like this hard? Jan 8 buy options on xyz Jan 9 go on tv and tweet about xyz being worth 5x its current price Jan 9/10/11 liquidate substantial majority of position Fucks sake.

It really just comes down to intent which is the case with most laws and regulations. The issue is you’d never get an honest answer from most of these ethic-less weasels. But the intent almost always is to say something to move the market and then cover as soon as possible. Thats not investing its market manipulation.

It’s like all these guys who wrap their presentations in myriad “fraud” and “bankrupt” or “criminal” accusations, but then solely for ass covering purposes start it all with “we believe”…they want the easy money but don’t actually want to stand behind their work.

If your intent is to manipulate the price and your actions confirm that, why should you be able to hide behind stupid disclaimers?

Well the key difference with say, Elon, is that he’s not tweeting something or putting out reports, and then almost immediately trading against what he put out. That’s conman behavior. But these guys call it “risk management” or “seeing if the market agrees with our research” lol.

Yup. Notice how smash and grab specialist Mr. Block has been focusing more on non US listed companies? The weasels are definitely worried.