Folks, I was just trying to explain, in my personal lingo, which is not always very diplomatic or elegant, that it's not good to have people use SHU as a vehicle for projecting individual business interests or for demanding apologies if someone on another forum steps on their academic prick, which, in real life, is often part of the same problem related to income generation. Ego boosting exercises tend to feed the sell side to the max, so that even the most ignorant short soul can simply copy / paste from SHU to write a devastating case against IOC. Phil's metaphorical shoestring is a case in point, and we are getting farther and farther away from exuberant NAV targets.
I fully agree with Palm, SHU should never have become a public forum pur sang. Instead, it should have been a private investor group, with sufficient long and short focus to inform the real investment case, in all its opportunities and risks. I also agree that this can only be done with a relatively small group of truth seekers who are sufficiently tolerant of differing facts and opinions. Whilst some personalities have been trampled on in a fatal way, I do feel that the possibility of re-installing such group is too easily discounted. But, if not actively pursued, I will have to live with it. There are other ways of generating intelligence on a smaller scale, though the bigger cause could be better served.
No harm meant through my communications yesterday. But my case stands, along the lines of Lib's post (http://shareholdersunite.com/mybb/showth...p?tid=5694), which clearly lays down the fact that SHU has become an overly pregnant hen house and -- hence -- very fertile ground for the short dickeys and their personal henchmen, some of whom were born and raised on this very forum. In that sense, SHU should reconsider its market definition and public manifestations, no matter how you look at it. The consensus, on my side, is that SHU has become a forum for creating false hope, repeating the same flagrant error every day. And, every day, I hear someone say: "Im done with shu".
Use or flosh.
But the longer you keep it on ice, the worse it gets.
Best,
Petrovale
I fully agree with Palm, SHU should never have become a public forum pur sang. Instead, it should have been a private investor group, with sufficient long and short focus to inform the real investment case, in all its opportunities and risks. I also agree that this can only be done with a relatively small group of truth seekers who are sufficiently tolerant of differing facts and opinions. Whilst some personalities have been trampled on in a fatal way, I do feel that the possibility of re-installing such group is too easily discounted. But, if not actively pursued, I will have to live with it. There are other ways of generating intelligence on a smaller scale, though the bigger cause could be better served.
No harm meant through my communications yesterday. But my case stands, along the lines of Lib's post (http://shareholdersunite.com/mybb/showth...p?tid=5694), which clearly lays down the fact that SHU has become an overly pregnant hen house and -- hence -- very fertile ground for the short dickeys and their personal henchmen, some of whom were born and raised on this very forum. In that sense, SHU should reconsider its market definition and public manifestations, no matter how you look at it. The consensus, on my side, is that SHU has become a forum for creating false hope, repeating the same flagrant error every day. And, every day, I hear someone say: "Im done with shu".
Use or flosh.
But the longer you keep it on ice, the worse it gets.
Best,
Petrovale