: have lots of knowledge about this stock and know its a dog
or, might be a dog.
You get the uprampers promoting the stock. You do heaps, maybe days, of work investigating their claims. Now you know more about the stock than the uprampers who clearly have not done their research. You can tell by the nonsense they spout. Some of them are really utterly clueless - but they can still influence newbies. So; what is wrong with refuting their rose coloured, blue sky assertions? And you keep in touch with the stock just in case it comes good. After all, you now know its potential, and you have put a lot of work into it. Or you have already made a motza on it before it went doggish.
You could ask the same questions about uprampers, i.e. why do they upramp?:
: been burnt before on this stock (and need to get their money back) : been burnt before in the sm in general (and need to get their money back) : have lots of knowledge about this stock and know it's a dog (but need to get their money back) : have a need to be a serial pest (and need to get their money back) etc.
You get the gist.
A few years ago I got onto the panel for "Who Wants to be a Millionaire", in the old format, fastest finger first. Ten contestants. You go through a days training on how it works, what to do etc. It was really interesting. There were three types of contestant. Those who were just there for fun (three). Those who really, really, wanted to win (four) and those who, by golly, NEEDED to win. Desperate. Tax bills. Failing business. It is not difficult to pick stock market punters the same way. Some uprampers are, unfortunately, desperate, IMO and experience.
