WLF, I agree with that theory and I would add anot

WLF, I agree with that theory and I would add another tactic to their strategy. Lots of days I'll watch the trades and can see it happening, where there are several big buys at the higher asking prices, quickly followed by usually much smaller sales to the lower bid prices. Of course not all are part of an organized effort, but if the same folks interested in accumulating loads of the stock had acquired (and paid "others" to acquire) a significant number of shares while dirt cheap, they could also snatch up a hell of a lot of shares without even shorting. All they have to do, when limit orders with lower bids are sitting on the board, is keep unloading small numbers of shares at that lower bid price and they can keep the price down in a certain range as long as major news releases haven't run them over with renewed demand.This tactic won't work forever, as they have a finite number of shares that they can unload this way without someone losing money, and at some point that method simply won't be big enough to stop the huge buying interest that's coming. However, as long as they are successful in keeping the price in the sweet zone, many shareholders will become nervous and/or impatient and dump their shares "throwing in the towel" as they've had all the waiting they were prepared to take. These shares are what they refer to as "shaken out", and the orchestrators are more than happy to scoop them up. When they get near the tipping point, they stop and let the price come back up a bit to prevent a full blown crash which they don't want because they prefer to keep the share structure where it is or "poised" for explosive upward moves.