GIG-BE Winners Named

COMMENTS

Newest First | Oldest First | Threaded View

<< < Page 14 / 20 > >>

TelCoEngineer 12/4/2012 | 11:25:13 PM

re: GIG-BE Winners Named No. Because there is something called the first
amendment which protects journalism.

_______________

Unless, of course, it is found that Lightreading editors of people that know Lightreading editors made stock purchases or shorts right before the release of the article......

Reply | Post Message | MESSAGES LIST | START A BOARD

cfaller 12/4/2012 | 11:25:12 PM

re: GIG-BE Winners Named skeptic wrote:
"Given that Corvis went up based on similar leaks
of how "great" they were positioned for GIGBE,
how can you and your stock-speculation friends
come out complaining now?"
---------------

I don't always see eye to eye with skeptic, but on this I wholeheartedly agree. CORV had a huge run-up on speculation put forth by management itself, along with some unsavory internet pumpers (Sparxe claiming that CORV "got GIGBE" was shameless, but unsurprising).

Did I see a bunch of people say "Thank God!", sell their shares while they were ahead, and move on to better opportunities? No. All I saw during that time were a bunch of "oohs" and "aahs" and "look at it go!" on the CORV board.

A lot of you had your chance to get out ahead when CORV was up, but at that point greed took over and you stayed in. Too bad, now get over it.

Why is everyone so angry about this article? Look at it this way- if you're so sure that Phil is wrong, then why are you so upset? If CORV is going to win GIGBE, then time will prove that out, and this temporary dip in the share price is just that, temporary, and isn't worth fretting over. (Of course, if you're a day trader trying to pump and dump CORV, then you've got a lot to fret about, but who cares about a bunch of glorified gamblers with overinflated egos?)

This much emotion in one stock is unhealthy, and if you're going to get this upset about an unfavorable article, regardless of its veracity, perhaps the problem isn't the journalist, but the reader. If you're looking to kill the messenger, then perhaps you've lost perspective with your investments.

Reply | Post Message | MESSAGES LIST | START A BOARD

networking_legend 12/4/2012 | 11:25:11 PM

re: GIG-BE Winners Named Unless, of course, it is found that Lightreading editors of people that know Lightreading editors made stock purchases or shorts right before the release of the article......

What exactly are you insinuating...?

Reply | Post Message | MESSAGES LIST | START A BOARD

jr2 12/4/2012 | 11:25:11 PM

re: GIG-BE Winners Named
>>No. Because there is something called the first
amendment which protects journalism.

I don't think it is completely correct. If, for example, all the parties affected can file a class action lawsuit against LR, a judge can use his/her discretion to force LR to reveal its source. First Amendment works as far as protecting the source, but, if the affected party can show the article being FALSE or misleading has caused real loss, they may be liable, and hence they may be made amenable to reveal the source.

That is my opinion. (I might have watched too much Law and Order too).

Reply | Post Message | MESSAGES LIST | START A BOARD

TelCoEngineer 12/4/2012 | 11:25:10 PM

re: GIG-BE Winners Named What exactly are you insinuating...?

**************

No insinuation. But, if I were someone attached to Lightreading, and I had bought or sold CORV, SYCM, etc late last week, I would have all of my documentation together. I would be VERY surprised if the SEC doesn't do at least a cursory investigation.

Any time a small number of people can influence the price of a stock this drastically the investigators are attracted like (pick your metaphor).

Reply | Post Message | MESSAGES LIST | START A BOARD

2dumb4words 12/4/2012 | 11:25:08 PM

re: GIG-BE Winners Named So why should society have rules? law enforcement agencies? courts? Why shouldn't Clinton hsw a 19year old employee in the Oval Office? Bush can bomb whomever the hell he pleases... Bernie and Scott can call it opex or capex... who cares? Enron execs can circumvent the partnership rules because they don't have time to follow them when there is so much shareholder money to fleece... I could go on and on but it is stupid people like you and the fact that our country is becoming a true democracy that will lead to the downfall of freedom...

People are upset because
1) Phil can either barely write or was deliberately deceitful in his composition of this article... either way he represents the worst of our society... the barely literate or the untrustworthy

2) the difference between Dr Huber dislosing GIGBE details and what happened here.... well if you are that dumb.... why bother trying to explain it to you... coming from a company officer... well... it doesn't qualify as insider trading / violation of insider information laws unless he too called Martha prior to coming public with the info...for a source involved in the bidding/with company bidding to divulge the information... well it is analagous to the individual involved with drug approval announcements leaking... and he or she went to jail... moreover the fact that Huber disclosed this information despite having signed an NDA should tell you something about his prospects for winning... whether this article is true or not...

3) Why? Exactly the question I would expect from a 3 year old anarchist...because whomever has that information will either then go trade or be ready to trade once the info hits the wires... either way they have benefitted from the disclosure of material non-public information.

Reply | Post Message | MESSAGES LIST | START A BOARD

opticaljester 12/4/2012 | 11:25:07 PM

re: GIG-BE Winners Named The only oneGÇÖs who should be investigated by the SEC/DoD/GAO should be DISA,SAIC and ATT!

These organizations have run the scam of the decade!

Reply | Post Message | MESSAGES LIST | START A BOARD

2dumb4words 12/4/2012 | 11:25:06 PM

re: GIG-BE Winners Named Look here dummy....

I never said that LR article will lead to downfall of society. I stated that morons like you are the norm of our society and that now... with modern day communicatinos, polling, etc... our society is transitioning from a representative (1-person 1 vote to elect a better representative) to pure democracy (1-person 1 vote on virtually every issue). Since you are the marginal, average, normal voter... you and your marginal intellect, inadequate ability to maintain focus and attention, yet unyielding desire to have a say... you will be the downfall.

So pay close attention here... I'll try to keep it simple for you. LR has done nothing wrong. Except that if you read the original article it says very little and is extremely misleading and ambiguous. Seems designed this way to me. If the courts/SEC were to find that this was not an expression of the first ammendment (getting the scoop) but closer to yelling fire (manipulating the stock market by cleverly disguising marginal information as earthshattering)... I think that the journalistic veil behind not exposing the source would be lifted. I am stating that Wall Street analysts are not veiled behind journalistic secrecy laws and the SEC should have little problem finding out who confirmed this information for them.. unless of course the Wall street analysts are lying.

At that point, I AM SUGGESTING that we would find the sources, and from there find insider information had been used to benefit from this information in the stock market. Do I know this? No. But it is human nature this is why we have rules about what you are allowed to divulge and not divulge. Clearly when someone breaks NDA ... where there is smoke there is typically fire... so... if you are so naive as to think this has something to do with my values... once again... you are the marginal moron.

As for my motivations... none really just wanted to see if anyone really know anything... I am pretty convinced that if they do they are not writing for LR or posting here. Have never had $ in CORV.. though if I had a few $ in a brokerage right now, I'd probably throw them Corv's way as I think there is a 10-20% chance that this whole thing is scam/rumor passed on by shoddy journalists and analysts.

My motivation is more to say hey... this article said nothing... to ask "what do we really know?" and to state... from what I know of govt procurements and engineering lab/field migration... it makes little sense to think that this thing isn't still in the air with 2 or 3 players in every segment.

Furthermore... as stated previously I would bet that CORV doesn't get any of this if it is true that Huber violated NDA and was one of the only ones in the industry to do so publicly.... doing business with DISA/DoD... you've got to be able to keep your mouth shut.

Reply | Post Message | MESSAGES LIST | START A BOARD

cfaller 12/4/2012 | 11:25:06 PM

re: GIG-BE Winners Named 2dumb4words wrote:
"So why should society have rules? law enforcement agencies? courts? Why shouldn't Clinton hsw a 19year old employee in the Oval Office? Bush can bomb whomever the hell he pleases... Bernie and Scott can call it opex or capex... who cares? Enron execs can circumvent the partnership rules because they don't have time to follow them when there is so much shareholder money to fleece... I could go on and on but it is stupid people like you and the fact that our country is becoming a true democracy that will lead to the downfall of freedom..."
------------

I have trouble believing that an LR article will lead to the downfall of freedom. This is what I refer to as a lack of perspective. There is no law requiring all of us to read and believe everything that LR prints- if you don't like LR's ethics in journalism, then stop visiting this website and post somewhere else. If LR ends up wrong enough times, and enough people get fed up with inaccurate stories, then LR will become the telecom equivalent of the National Enquirer and/or go out of business. Either way, I think freedom is safe from the threat that is LightReading...
-------------

2dumb4words wrote:
"Why [be upset with LR for writing this story]?...because whomever has that information will either then go trade or be ready to trade once the info hits the wires... either way they have benefitted from the disclosure of material non-public information."
-------------------

Maybe that's what you would do with the information, and you're simply assuming everyone else would behave like you. Stop projecting your personality onto other people. The LR staff has better things to do than short CORV.

LR has a standard policy forbidding the conflicts of interest that have been suggested in many posts here. You may choose to think that they don't adhere to it, but, judging by the movement of the stock, Wall Street believes LR adheres to that policy. I also believe LR adheres to that policy- LR is a group of journalists that spend their days writing stories, not skimming a couple hundred bucks off of a stock.

For most reasonable people in the telecom industry, LR has a solid reputation, which is exactly why the share price was rocked by the article. Again, if LR is wrong, then the share price will come back and there is no harm to investors (and long term, LR loses a little bit of credibility in the marketplace). As many CORV cheerleaders have pointed out, no money is lost unless you actually sell while the stock is down. If you truly believe that Phil is wrong, then hold CORV and find out.

I question your motivation, 2dumb4words. I have a hunch you're not out here trying to protect freedom, maintain law & order, and defeat anarchy. Unlike LR, I think you have a financial interest in how well CORV fares with GIGBE.

Reply | Post Message | MESSAGES LIST | START A BOARD

skeptic 12/4/2012 | 11:25:05 PM

re: GIG-BE Winners Named 2) the difference between Dr Huber dislosing GIGBE details and what happened here.... well if you are that dumb.... why bother trying to explain it to you... coming from a company officer... well... it doesn't qualify as insider trading / violation of insider information laws unless he too called Martha prior to coming public with the info
-----------------
Right. Coming from a company officer, its fraud
and breach of contract (the NDA). Insider
trading would not be the issue, but releasing
false or misleading or protected information
to the public would certainly be at issue.

Reply | Post Message | MESSAGES LIST | START A BOARD

<< < Page 14 / 20 > >>