Comments on: Performance of spam stocks – a very non-scientific survey http://www.concurringopinions.com/archives/2006/05/performance_of.html The Law, the Universe, and Everything Tue, 14 Feb 2012 05:18:12 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.2.1 By: asdf http://www.concurringopinions.com/archives/2006/05/performance_of.html/comment-page-1#comment-59231 asdf Tue, 02 May 2006 22:52:08 +0000 http://www.solove.org/archives/2006/05/performance-of-spam-stocks-a-very-non-scientific-survey.html#comment-59231 But I guess that doesn't matter because my message didn't show up. The ssrn paper was based on this: http://www.crummy.com/2006/04/13/0 http://www.crummy.com/features/StockSpam/ But I guess that doesn’t matter because my message didn’t show up. The ssrn paper was based on this:

http://www.crummy.com/2006/04/13/0

http://www.crummy.com/features/StockSpam/

]]> By: asdf http://www.concurringopinions.com/archives/2006/05/performance_of.html/comment-page-1#comment-59230 asdf Tue, 02 May 2006 22:50:23 +0000 http://www.solove.org/archives/2006/05/performance-of-spam-stocks-a-very-non-scientific-survey.html#comment-59230 Sorry, overlooked the SSRN link already posted Sorry, overlooked the SSRN link already posted

]]> By: Vasu http://www.concurringopinions.com/archives/2006/05/performance_of.html/comment-page-1#comment-59229 Vasu Tue, 02 May 2006 15:29:19 +0000 http://www.solove.org/archives/2006/05/performance-of-spam-stocks-a-very-non-scientific-survey.html#comment-59229 This is bad. You should be using finance.google.com not Yahoo!. :) According to the finance.yahoo.com programmer, they haven't invested any serious time in developing that site for years. Google rocks however.. --Vasu. This is bad. You should be using finance.google.com not Yahoo!. :)

According to the finance.yahoo.com programmer, they haven’t invested any serious time in developing that site for years. Google rocks however..

–Vasu.

]]> By: Miriam Cherry http://www.concurringopinions.com/archives/2006/05/performance_of.html/comment-page-1#comment-59228 Miriam Cherry Tue, 02 May 2006 06:03:32 +0000 http://www.solove.org/archives/2006/05/performance-of-spam-stocks-a-very-non-scientific-survey.html#comment-59228 I was just going to say that this looks like quite an interesting topic for a full-length paper. I'd like to take a look at the link you posted, Bill (hi Bill!) but it doesn't seem to work. I wonder how much is lost in the typical pump-and-dump pink sheet scheme... Just as a side note, I wish that I were lucky enough to receive spam email with stock tips. Most of the spam that I receive either offers me viagra, or various other, er, male "enhancements". Now, there was that one time that I thought I won the lottery, but then I lost the proceeds when I provided bank account information to help an estate recover some money in Nigeria... ;) I was just going to say that this looks like quite an interesting topic for a full-length paper. I’d like to take a look at the link you posted, Bill (hi Bill!) but it doesn’t seem to work. I wonder how much is lost in the typical pump-and-dump pink sheet scheme…

Just as a side note, I wish that I were lucky enough to receive spam email with stock tips. Most of the spam that I receive either offers me viagra, or various other, er, male “enhancements”. Now, there was that one time that I thought I won the lottery, but then I lost the proceeds when I provided bank account information to help an estate recover some money in Nigeria… ;)

]]> By: Bill Sjostrom http://www.concurringopinions.com/archives/2006/05/performance_of.html/comment-page-1#comment-59227 Bill Sjostrom Tue, 02 May 2006 03:01:53 +0000 http://www.solove.org/archives/2006/05/performance-of-spam-stocks-a-very-non-scientific-survey.html#comment-59227 Coincidentally, I blogged earlier today about a new SSRN paper on this very topic. See <a href="http://www.truthonthemarket.com/2006/05/01/stcck-spam/" rel="nofollow">here</a>. Coincidentally, I blogged earlier today about a new SSRN paper on this very topic. See here.

]]> By: Paul Gowder http://www.concurringopinions.com/archives/2006/05/performance_of.html/comment-page-1#comment-59226 Paul Gowder Tue, 02 May 2006 01:22:27 +0000 http://www.solove.org/archives/2006/05/performance-of-spam-stocks-a-very-non-scientific-survey.html#comment-59226 So here's the question for stock wizards. Actually, two questions. (And WHY am I posting them on a public blog instead of privately asking someone and using the answers to make money? Dunno. Maybe I'm just contrarian like that.) 1. Is there any way to place market bets on volume? There's so many weird stock instruments now, options and futures etc. etc., surely there's a way to cash in on spikes in the VOLUME of trading. (Perhaps buying shares in broker commissions?) 2. Can one short-sell on the pink sheets? Say, about 1.5 days after the spams go out? So here’s the question for stock wizards. Actually, two questions. (And WHY am I posting them on a public blog instead of privately asking someone and using the answers to make money? Dunno. Maybe I’m just contrarian like that.)

1. Is there any way to place market bets on volume? There’s so many weird stock instruments now, options and futures etc. etc., surely there’s a way to cash in on spikes in the VOLUME of trading. (Perhaps buying shares in broker commissions?)

2. Can one short-sell on the pink sheets? Say, about 1.5 days after the spams go out?

]]>