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: Jack Rayfield who wrote (4276)	8/7/1999 8:57:00 PM
From: Wilhelm Hansen	Read Replies (1) of 8117

My answers to your points raised: "Garry R and Wilhelm it is funny to me that you two seem to have posted only once in the last 4 months to this forum before the last week..." What does that have to do with it? Do those that post frequently claim proprietorship of this thread? I didn't post because I had nothing worthwhile to contribute. I didn't hype the stock in it's glory days and I didn't engage in negative postings when it headed south. I am simply an infrequent poster and I want to keep it that way. "...and you are carrying the Pyng flag..." How do you figure that from what I said? You are assuming that I am happy with my investment and that I approve of management's missed targets. "...while the majority of the people that have actively posted to the thread are considered negative posters just because they call it like they see it." The majority of posters you are talking about constitute an absolute minority of shareholders. However, I would assume that most shareholders at this stage are less than happy. That includes me. But that doesn't mean that they would engage in repetitive negative postings, making the stock less attractive to potential new investors. "I would be interested to hear from you which of the negative statements made, you consider erroneous or unsubstantiated..." I didn't say erroneous or unsubstantiated, Jack. Garry objected to the repetitiveness of the negative posts. I agreed with him. "...As that is the only criteria that would qualify a post as management "bashing" in my opinion." I disagree. In my opinion directing the same negative posts at management over and over again is bashing. And labelling some of the posts as negative is really an understatement. "To answer your concern Wilhelm I can assure you that I control about 72,000 shares..." I was not concerned about you when I was wondering about some of the negative posters being shareholders. With regards to the latest wrinkle, re-pricing of the options, I have to side with those who take a dim view of it. Bad move by Pyng IMHO.

Report TOU Violation

Share This Post

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next