Quote from jimrockford:
No, once again your facts, reasoning, and defamation of IB are wrong.
IB's Chairman, who you call "TP", is not going to sue IB. He has, in exchange for covering IB's loss on the recent Altana short squeeze, accepted assignment of the right to sue those possible market manipulators, outside of IB, who caused IB's loss. So it is ludicrous for you to suggest that there is any basis for your accusation that the Chair's intent to sue other parties indicates any possibility of criminality by IB. Even if somebody were to file some civil suit against IB, this again would not be any basis for your accusation of criminality against IB. It seems like you don't even understand the difference between civil and criminal matters.
You are wrong to suggest that you are entitled to say such things about IB. It is against the law to make false accusations of criminality, as you have repeatedly done against IB. This is called "defamation" and gives IB the right to sue you and to collect damages from you. Your use of the words "in my opinion" does not in any way change that you are breaking the law by falsely accusing IB of criminality.
Anybody who reads this thread can see that you have repeatedly posted accusations regarding IB's integrity, honesty and financial stability, and then, in response to criticism, denied writing the things you did, in fact, write. The only thing that could change this reality would be the possible future deletion or editing of your defamatory postings by the moderators. Your postings are not calculated to persuade rational people paying close attention to our debate. Your postings are instead targeted to damage IB's reputation in the eyes of people who aren't paying close attention.
I think it is unreasonable for you to suggest that IB's Chairman should reimburse stockholders for all future declines in their share prices. He did fully reimburse stockholders for the amount lost in the recent incident. I think it is unreasonable for you to suggest that he should go beyond that figure. I think it is unreasonable for you to ignore the fact that other factors influence the stock price, not just the one recent incident, and that stockholders took the risk of losing money on such factors when they purchased the stock.
This is really starting to be funny. If you took the time to read my LAST post, I / we are saying the same thing.
I never said TP was going to sue IB, I said TP has the right to sue and based upon some of the news releases that is his direction....thus....civil litigation as per my post and you can bet SEC and other regulatory bodies are investigating the possibility of criminal charges. I totally agree when one buys or shorts a stock many things influence its direction but you can not possible say that the recent retracement and the present issue is not ONE OF THE FACTORS of the recent fall to now 2250. It is you again who keeps posting certain adjectives that are inflammatory not me.
Jim, I have no agenda other than correcting your posts of you incorrectly stating what I have / am saying.
I did not say that TP should or shouldn't reimburse shareholders, what I said was that shareholders lost money as a result of the incident which is present in the current bid/ask YOU STATED the TP had reimbursed all losses which is not true what TP did was reimburse IB the corporation. Longs were / are SOL.
Further, you state TP via an assignment has the right to sue those possible manipulators etc...Would you not say that / if it is true that the action was not criminal or a conspiracy to commit? Because one choose to proceed with a civil litigation does not mean that a crime has not been committed, in fact if you know law, all civil litigation acts that lead to a successful outcome would of somewhere committed a criminal act, usually perjury for self preservation reasons. The regulatory bodies may or may not decide based upon its severity proceed. You need to look up the definition of fraud. We have them committed on us in all facets of our daily lives from every long wknd gas prices going up to issues in our field.
For the record I am entitled to my opinion and the fact I believe an action should or should not be criminal does not mean that by me saying so I have committed a crime.
God man, I don't know how many times I have to post this
I am an IB customer, I acknowledge IB's support staff has gotten much better over the last few years, on the whole executions are good. I support IB in posts all the time.
My posts are not directed at IB but YOU as YOU keep putting words in my mouth, you keep posting inaccuracies of my posts.
I am responding to YOU and your slanderous use of the English language towards me. I post POSITIVE responses all the time re IB and post my personal or my traders experiences related directly to our office. That does not make them lies or slanderous but just facts.
Finally, I do not believe IB will go bankrupt or is in anyway financially unstable....I HAVE NO WAY OF KNOWING THAT AND THUS DID / WOULD NOT SAY IT.
What I am saying is we do not know the agenda of the big boys and they will use any op to cause the stock especially a new IPO to drop to buy shares at a lower price similar to the daily short squeezes used to assist the big boys their exits and maintain the desired bid/ask and that we as traders are victims. The game here is to take our money. One winner one loser.
I have no idea what or where IB will trade but feel comfortable owning shares, writing puts and buying calls high teens / 20 area.
that's it.
you're unbelievable.
w
