Right, what is the worth of a document, if you are threatened when you attempt to get verification and clarification; the Company refuses to acknowledge the concerns of shareholders, and feel threatened when asked valid questions by shareholders; when you contact third parties for verification and they deny relationships or run to the Company with their lawyers and want explanations as well; when insiders leak information to a chosen few to issue email threats and warnings; when the word of officials in any company cannot be relied upon - paper is worthless. Foundation is worthless.
THE COMPANY HAS NOT ONLY IGNORED MY CONCERNS BUT THE VALID EMAILS OF OTHER INVESTORS WHO HAVE PROFERRED UP THEIR CONCERNS AND THEY TOO HAVE BEEN IGNORED AND DISREGARDED.
That firecrest stock is worthless until XSNI is fact; that there has been a flood of documentation issued by a company that has its barristers draw up these documents with over 30 years of experience in manufacturing and establishing corporations is a FACT. That I spoke with so and so in May and documented exactly what was said is a FACT. That I called Lehmans all over and finally got the right Lehmans UK and Andy Laslow and documented all of that mess is a FACT. That Lucent, so and so and so and so's partners are upset that I tried to get verification and explanations for the descrepancies and I got calls and threats is a FACT.
There have been documents filed in the UK and the Feb 1999 shareholder release that say things about XSNI that are not FACT and cannot be validated, nor does the company want anything validated is FACT.
You need to step back and see exactly the BIG PICTURE starting over 2 years ago. not the minute myopic details - just the plan, then you will know how these guys think and what they think of us - the ignorant tell em anything print up anything they'll believe it moron shareholders; and if they make waves by trying to get the facts, we'll silence em with threats and intimidation.
Well, in other companies that don't provide accurate information or at least have inconsistencies in their public documentation, it is not against the law to go to the third parties to verify and validate and it is not against the law to call a spade a spade and it is not against the law to inform others of inaccuracies and to try to get others to see if they can find some facts out too and to get others to help define exactly what the company is. As a matter of fact DILIGENCE is not against the law in the United States.
Investors who paid US Cash for their XSNI stocks have tried to get verification from the company and nothing came out after May 19, 1999 from the executive offices; there was a flurry of information coming out of the back rooms though.
so and so did not say XSNI was nethead, God or anything else, it is now "the free ISP in the UK", and that DOES fit in with the "software client" description of XSNI, just a small aspect of the Big Deal, see prior posts.
Meyers says now that xstream UK is a privately held company, and that I believe is correct and I bet Lucent and Lehmans believes it too. I have to stop there because that is when the threats came in to stop doing DD - up to someone else to ask the Company for explanation or ask Lehmans and Lucent what they know about that bloomberg report if you want to get any response from the Company; after all Lehmans is mentioned in the Feb 1999 report about working on XSNI that they know nothing about; and Lucent has xstream UK documentation in that pdf file on their public website detailing the CONTRACT but I don't think that Lucent pdf file was talking about XSNI, and I don't think Lucent even knew anything about XSNI, they do, however, now.
But I am pretty stupid and don't know much about the market, having only been investing since Late November 1998. But I don't like being treated like a moron and I don't like being given reams and reams of worthless paper to read nor do I like being sent on wild goose chases by a Company to verify anything and nothing comes to be valid or as a result of getting verification, get threatened. Something is just not right.
That a company thought they were going to get an apology from me for calling a spade a spade after two months of attempting to get explanation for discrepancies is outrageous; how about that company apologizing to all these investors here who have been hanging on a damn thread and begging for information and now all that we get is confirmation from Paul Meyers that CEOS are operating out of a privately held company led to believe that XSNI is that privately held company.
And how about a public apology to me, JACALYN M. DEANER, for that heavy handed attempt with the NYC attorney to "slap" me with threats and intimidation; I don't appreciate it and it is not warranted nor legal in the United States. All the Company had to do was explain why they don't want verification being conducted and what is with all the conflicting information about XSNI - just what the hell is it, truthfully and succinctly not constant referrals to that Feb 1999 document full of inconsistencies and already known that Lehman's denied knowledge of - stuff like that.
The above would be my concerns if I were interested in this POS. I hope this rides up to that POP everyone was promised in May and you can all get rich together, I'll make my money in companies I can talk with and have open communication that can be verified and validated, without threats and intimidation for asking questions.
JACALYN M. DEANER |
