(24-02-2012, 10:55 PM)corydorus Wrote: [ -> ]I think my earlier may have been misunderstood. The intent is not to simply comply to the order.
If a company is not very open to comments, VB can stop allowing that counter be discussed or covered forever, not just that thread. This will indirectly protect forummers from giving unwelcome comments and also not expose them to such companies thus helping investors from being induced to invest in that counter that has been viewed negatively and not welcome by their management.
If you receive more letter from other companies, ban that counter concern. You can assess the situation again if is not practical. But I doubt you will have that many letters.
I second that. ie,
1) Lock the thread to prevent further posts. Move the thread to a new 'Hall-of-Fame' (or 'Hall-of-Shame') category, together with others that'd been delisted, so that anyone can still access the thread for their own reference.
2) To protect the well-being of this site and all stake-holders, ban all further discussion of the said stock. Anyone who'd done a useful analysis (supported by facts and figures) can still send it to the MODs to vet first, who'd then decide whether to add it to the original thread. Alternatively, they can post in their own blog (at their own risk) and post the link in this forum for all to read.
There're many listed companies out there. I don't think the majority of us will miss that one single stock that much anyway.
Below is an opinion of a lawyer in practice of more than 20 years.
Normally they just warn and ask the related posts to be taken down,failing which they may resort to legal action. For a public listed company to sue a porter or forummers over so-called " defamation remarks ", it will also put them in bad light, unless they are really compelled to.
can anyone speculate which firm is that? i will try to 'take exta care' when investing in that firm.
For a public listed company , spending times monitoring forum in cyberspace is a waste of shareholders' fund.
Can this activity improve shareholders' value ?
(24-02-2012, 10:55 PM)corydorus Wrote: [ -> ]I think my earlier may have been misunderstood. The intent is not to simply comply to the order.
If a company is not very open to comments, VB can stop allowing that counter be discussed or covered forever, not just that thread. This will indirectly protect forummers from giving unwelcome comments and also not expose them to such companies thus helping investors from being induced to invest in that counter that has been viewed negatively and not welcome by their management.
If you receive more letter from other companies, ban that counter concern. You can assess the situation again if is not practical. But I doubt you will have that many letters.
Fully agree with this suggestion. Just wonder why not taking
the company private if not very open to comments. They don't seem to understand what is public listed company ?
(25-02-2012, 08:50 AM)cfa Wrote: [ -> ]Below is an opinion of a lawyer in practice of more than 20 years.
Normally they just warn and ask the related posts to be taken down,failing which they may resort to legal action. For a public listed company to sue a porter or forummers over so-called " defamation remarks ", it will also put them in bad light, unless they are really compelled to.
They just want to play play with you. A simple lawyer's letter to scare you ...
It's very hard for them to prove that your comments and remarks, have directly lead to a certain amount of loss in their market cap.
Although you may eventually win any lawsuit, you will need to first come out with the $15,000 for the legal fees and then to spend a few months fighting that lawsuit.
They know that you dont want to go through that hassle. And neither do they want to have the negative publicity either.
So that's your worst-case scenario and it's not as bad as you think it is.
(25-02-2012, 10:53 AM)pianist Wrote: [ -> ]can anyone speculate which firm is that? i will try to 'take exta care' when investing in that firm.
Hint: Its a property company
Accepted public monies when they go IPOs, but don't accept public comments.
Aviod these kind of companies .
I feel like buying 1 lot in the company shares and stirring s.hit at the AGM! Must question them whose money are they using to issue the lawyer letter and whether such a move is in the interest of shareholders and the company!
I feel like buying 1 lot in the company shares and stirring s.hit at the AGM! Must question them whose money are they using to issue the lawyer letter and whether such a move is in the interest of shareholders and the company!
(26-02-2012, 01:54 PM)propertyinvestor Wrote: [ -> ]I feel like buying 1 lot in the company shares and stirring s.hit at the AGM! Must question them whose money are they using to issue the lawyer letter and whether such a move is in the interest of shareholders and the company!
ok, i join you to agitate him, seems he's always agitated when asked the difficult questions, as mentioned in an earlier posting.
Whose money it is ? They think it's their money lah.
Also, spending time during office hour to go through forum reflects very well on company. Very efficient use of resources.
I'm sure you have very smart IT people in this forum. Can check where the IP address is from. I already know whose IP address it is...