Shell Submits New Offer

[jft310]

It's the way Blair wrote his article. Lot's of ways to say things and Blair chose to use the word DEAD which most picked up as the Exxon talks were dead. That's his fault for his choice of words and yes his editor should have caught that. And yes when persons sell because of such stories and have real losses they hire lawyers and sue those that stated the false information.Blair messed up big time.

[admin]

Congrats also to Resourcearb on this. He stated he has a very credible source and the guy nailed it.

Yes, I second that

[Palm]

Interesting that we don't see same news sources picking this up as they did the negatively tainted story from last week

[Tree]

288,000 traded in first 39 mins.
Just wait until the market figures out we are now 3$ over Pavel's new $65 price target!! What's that??? That was just a mistake by flyonwall and was promptly removed. So 100$ stands??? Sigh.....

[Getitrt2]

Anybody able to communicate info from this article to Fly on the Wall? That might get something under Yahoo Headlines.

[admin]

Yea, isn't it amazing how nothing seems to have picked up the story, while somehow every twisted short crap is immediately echoed across major media and the internet.

[Palm]

Difference maybe that it is a story behind the wall of a subscriber service?

[admin]

Difference maybe that it is a story behind the wall of a subscriber service?

Fair point. But SHU is free!

[Palm]

The real difference IMO is that the planned short attack is just that; planned. The barrels are loaded with ammo and the stories that get disseminated are only one thing; a smoke screen. Usually the shorting starts early and as the stories get splatted about it only gives the shorts "cover". If investigated they can simply say, "Look at all of those news stories out there. We had good reason to short the stock."

[Getitrt2]

Agree in large part, but the stories add to the selling. The SEC needs to investigate all of it, and identify the sources of the "stories".