Ann: Activity update , page-111

JoeIP: Actually, I'm not always negative about CSS. Where there are positives I'll talk about them, there just aren't many at all, and there are heaps of negatives. It's a very, very negative situation which is why I'm mostly negative about it.

I haven't answered your question about whether or not I'm holding because it's a stupid one. Obviously I don't hold any, it would be insane to hold, and I keep saying that. It's also on the left of each post - no position. My sentiment has been sell on CSS for years (also displayed next to every post). It's the same as the way I can see you hold the stock and believe it's good to buy and hold in the long term (assuming you're as honest as I am).

I've already answered the question before about why I pay attention and post. I started following CSS a few years ago because I thought it was interesting and had potential. It was always a very big risk, but I'm not risk averse. Things went bad, worse, even worse and then ridiculous, and it has been an interesting evolution to watch. I like to try to watch a variety of companies - big, small, successful, honest, unsuccessful, liars, the good, bad and ugly. I think that allows you to maintain a more well-rounded understanding of companies and the market as a whole. As far as posting goes, I find it quite fascinating to see that the company which is the most obviously terrible of the ones I watch still has people supporting it. Watching people discussing a dying company in a positive way is interesting and has its uses too. It's also partly that taking an interest in something and getting to know about it encourages one to discuss it.

Do I honestly believe they've achieved nothing? Of course, unless demonstrating that breeding SBT is a bloody difficult thing to do. They're basically no further ahead with the research than they were several years ago. They keep claiming success and progress, but they're just doing the same thing year after year - spawn a heap of eggs, raise three quarters of f*** all to a small size before they die, claim success and start again the following season.

Do you honestly believe they have achieved something? Other than saying "They've come so far, ZOMG!" or some such nonsense, what can you say they actually have achieved? What can you say which demonstrates that they're further ahead than they were 1, 2 or 3 years ago? 160 babies compared to 149 doesn't count. 10,000 compared to 200 would be impressive, but even then it wouldn't mean much unless they got them to a decent size, and even then it would just be novelty research unless it was economically viable.

It's funny that you say I'm like a broken record when I'm less repetitive than the rampers and I actually make sense. I think you only consider my posts inappropriate because you don't like what I'm saying.

big mahn: I certainly have no intention of buying. I have basically no doubt that CSS will cease operations in the not too distant future, and management has put enough spin out there to convince enough people that there is far more value than exists to ensure CSS doesn't get close to being undervalued. When liquidation comes I am fairly confident that if you get anything back it will be less than the last share price of the company. I'd go through the figures but I'd probably be accused of being a pesky mosquito being inappropriate :P

I don't watch TV shows, I don't use Facebook, I don't do a lot of the things most people do to kill time. I find it interesting to watch a company like CSS, and I consider it at least as worthwhile as the alternative passtime of harvesting crops on a virtual farm. If you find that amusing I'm happy for you :)