PYNG Technologies Message Board

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Gold/Mining/Energy : PYNG Technologies

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next

To: HotShot1 who wrote (4148)	7/13/1999 10:49:00 AM
From: Jack Rayfield	Read Replies (4) of 8117

HotShot1 I just reported the exact statements included in the Discovery 99 Expo PYNGF profile. I am not sure if I believe the statement. We will have to wait and see. Five years is along time and although 29k for next year looks to me like a reasonable number, I am not sure 350K in 5 years is attainable with what little information we have now. It is obvious that I have more confidence that the FAST 1 will be widely accepted by EMS units all across the nation eventually than you do. We make a good contrast you are fanatically pessimistic and I may be overly optimistic that is what makes a thread interesting. Although you have been right on one point, I am not sure why anyone would believe anything that Pyng has to say right now and obviously they do not. They have exhausted all credibility and continue to avoid updating previous erroneous statements. It seems Pyng thinks that if the they avoid correcting prior statements and keep us in the dark maybe everyone will just lose interest and get off their backs. That seems to be working if the response on this thread and in the market is any indication. It is obvious that the brokers, anlaysts and fund managers present at the Discovery Expo did not bite on their story, which is an opportunity lost in my opinion that could have been avoided with some candid communication on revised goals and explanations of delays. But I have always thought that Pyng's biggest weakness was the attitude that "we have a great product and we do not have to answer to anyone". And sadly for us they don't have to. It is unfortunate that the restricted shares that represent total control of the company are allowed to vote before the cashflow restriction is met. But the real blame should fall on us investors as we knew when we bought Pyng that the control was in Mr. Jacobs hands and the if he decided to ignore the shareholders then we would be powerless. I think the Board of Directors has failed miserably in their fiduciary duty to represent the shareholders interest and demand that any statement made in public be corrected immediately when it proves false. I certainly knew it was a possibility that shareholders would be ignored, but foolishly dismissed this potential negative because, I had so much confidence in the product's success and the truth of managements statements. I just did not know a company could make statements publicly and not take responsibility for them when they proved false. I certainly have learned a valuable, although expensive lesson and I hope that everyone else has too. The evalution of management and the existence of an independent BOD is at least as important as the product's potential in small basically "closely held" companys.

Report TOU Violation

Share This Post

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next