Jump to content

SLA - SILK LASER AUSTRALIA LIMITED


ShareCafe

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 43.2k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

  • chiller

    2097

  • diana

    1910

  • Livas1

    4166

  • jezzabot

    2629

Top Posters In This Topic

Posted Images

As was said earlier funny how people react to the rumour of the insider trading makes me laugh. Maybe Its the directors showing what agressive buying would have done.

 

Spicer, hope your mate has his trading account set up http://www.sharescene.com/html/emoticons/wink.gif

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Nice pick up at 65 cents on the SLACE yesterday!

 

Must chatter about the release of sensitive info and initially as my posts suggest I agreed with the fact that directors would of had an obligation to disclose the relevant information. Having said that, I've changed my way of thinking as directors informed the public that they were in fact in possession of price sensitive information which was of a positive nature though not giving the exact specifics. I therefore now don't believe "technically" that anything could or should be done in respect of this matter and that the recent news articles may serve as a positive to creating interest in this company. http://www.sharescene.com/html/emoticons/biggrin.gif

 

Still on for a major announcement before the end of Feb.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Can someone do me a favour and put a bid in on the SLACF. Then can someone please take it out!! My portfolio is down around 60% without the SLACF figure!! http://www.sharescene.com/html/emoticons/biggrin.gif

 

Managed to just stay out of the top twenty holders with my recent buys on the SLACES.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In reply to: BullseyeBob on Friday 15/02/08 08:43am

G'day BB,

 

I think AtMarket has eloquently explained the discrepancies I noticed in the article.

 

As I said earlier all publicity is good publicity, just don't worry about facts http://www.sharescene.com/html/emoticons/lmaosmiley.gif

 

Cheers Charles

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Nice one!!!

 

To me the significance lies in the reduction of time patients need to be in care.....not only are you saving $$$ by putting them through the system quicker, you are also freeing up valuable time and resources for other patients......$5000 spent on Ropren to free up a bed, 7-14 days sooner, sounds like a bargain to me...... http://www.sharescene.com/html/emoticons/ohmy.gif

 

That article sounds like a bunch of sour grapes to me....if they are so woried about it there's all of $60k to spend today and no-one "sitting up and taking notice"......release of these results hasn't done a hell of a lot for the SP first thing today, so I guess it puts any worries about the ASX investigating SLA's directors back in it's ugly little box....... http://www.sharescene.com/html/emoticons/tongue.gif

 

Todays's the day to buy IMHO......get in quick before the flood of announcements begins in earnest, and the directors snap up the cheapies.

 

Coffee and Ropren for breakfast ...... Yes please!

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In reply to: mme on Friday 15/02/08 10:10am

Mme,

 

Can someone do me a favour and put a bid in on the SLACF

 

Can't be done. I tried this morning, but untill my SLACF's show on my Etrade portfolio my hands are tied.

 

THOUGH, when I called they said I could. http://www.sharescene.com/html/emoticons/weirdsmiley.gif

They said it would take a day or so for the SLACF's to show on my portfolio, but in the mean time I could trade, but when I did try to put an order to sell, the order was rejected.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In reply to: Vilmac on Friday 15/02/08 11:25am

Probably have to put the order through over the phone

 

I have had to do that in the past when the electronic version rejected any orders more than 3 price steps from last trade (have not had that problem for some time so rule has probably changed)

 

B.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

A hell of a lot of trees have been sacrificed for all the articles the AGE has published about the problems alcoholism and drug addiction are causing in our society, so it's slightly surprising that a drug that might actually alleviate some of these problems should be glossed over so flippantly in favour of a whiff of scandal.

 

(well pretty predictable actually. Anyway AtMarket and Charles have probably got it right that any publicity is good publicity.)

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×
×
  • Create New...