Message 3731014
Malicious intent continues today on RB even though I have made it clear otherwise.>>>
To: Garfield who wrote (44087)
From: tonto Tuesday, Mar 17 1998 5:31AM ET
Reply # of 54887
>>>The cartel was formed to increase shareholder value. We know that Olympus Ventures is way undervalued at below $2.5, and based on projected 12 month revenues of $15 million plus dollars.. This alone should have them trading at $15 to $20 in 12 months or less.<<<
I have posted previously about inaccurate conclusions will be drawn when one starts out with faulty information. The above snip from Riley's post highlights just that.
The company advised the public that it was projecting tremendous revenues which also had high profit margins. This was not the case, it had neither. Buyers believed it and now are hurt.
What I and others suspect is the MM's hammered this one into the ground to try and force a terminal short to avoid capital gains on every share that they have sold short in OVIS. I have now estimated the legal public float and EXTRA shares in the market to be over 4 million plus shares. The public float in OVIS is 1.6 million shares that puts the extra shares floating around being traded at 2.4 million or higher. You do the math to figure the value of the real 1.6 million shares during a short squeeze.
The initial post supported the short theory, and that the company was trading way below its actual value because of all the illegal naked shorting going on. That is the only way one can explain why the company is trading way below its true market value. Problem with that theory is that the company was not doing the sales projected, was not profitable, and was drastically reducing operations voluntarily and not so voluntarily. It appears now, the company was trading in the pennies as it should have been.
The public was fooled into believing the company was something it is not and bought into it. Does anyone still believe there was a group of shorters who took the price down on this company based on the facts we have all learned that the company was for all practical purposes not much more than a shell? Or, had the market fairly valued the company
prior to the rush of buyers coming in?
Lots of false accusations have been made regarding many that post here. I have made it very clear that I am not involved with mm's of this stock, but a few continue to make up stories to the contrary with out a shred of evidence to support them. They never will be able to produce any for none exists. On the other hand, the case for planned defamation of my character will be very strong.
I am pleased to see that you are considering becoming more involved and hope to have greater influence in your company as a group. That will be an excellent improvement over the current scenario.
Good luck.
AND NOW COMES BMART. ANYONE WITH COPIES OF THE POSTS THAT HAD TO BE DELETED AND THE
REASON FOR THE NEW "MONIKER" PLEASE E-MAIL PM THEM TO ME.
Message 3750029
To: bmart who wrote (44101)
From: Ron Reece Wednesday, Mar 18 1998 5:26PM ET
Reply # of 54887
Bmart,
Nice to have you join this little discussion...... <wink>
Would you care to amplify for us "idyits" just who you spoke with?
Also, I'm pleased that some apparent "someone" within the company was willing to allay your fears and inform you privately of all these positive tidbits of information.
Did they, by sheer chance, also tell you why they have been unwilling to relay this positive information publicly???
Until I hear it from the company and know that the information is presented in a format that holds them legally bound to its veracity, you are no better than those other individuals who choose to believe that RMIL management's word is "golden".... :0|
Btw, just what did you hope to achieve by posting this retrash of unverifiable and private information to me?? Do you suspect that I care about what they say on the phone in circumstances that are unverifiable and not legally binding??
Regards,
Ron
Message 3778646
IS 32 YEARS OLD? <ggg>
To: Ron Reece who wrote (44121)
From: bmart Friday, Mar 20 1998 11:25AM ET
Reply # of 54887
Mr. Reece,
I have lived alot of years, and at the risk of sounding condescending, I will tell you that only a child attempts to whip the world with their mouth.
I will not be pulled into your war here. But I will inform you that my curiousity lead me to call the company. A very pleasant young woman informed me that the ten million dollars will be finalized by March 27th and that the market makers completed their diligence on the 15C-211s.
If you are suggesting that I have been lied to by this young woman, or that I should have gone further in my travails, I would suggest to you Mr. Reece that maybe you should have have done as much with Green Oasis. It appears that you rationalize your conduct on this board with your Green Oasis experience. I do not see the correlation. I respect what Riley G. is doing here, I only wish I was a few years younger and had the risk tolerance to participate in this venture.
Good day Mr. Reece.
RB
Message 3784700
A wise question. Now what was actually said on the private e-mail thread?
To: bmart who wrote (44162)
From: s martin Friday, Mar 20 1998 4:58PM ET
Reply # of 54887
It seems you've come here with a grudge against Ron Reece and little understanding of how meaningless the comments by the "very pleasant young woman" are.
BMART REFERENCE REGARDING THE TRUTH.
Message 3785082
To: s martin who wrote (44168)
From: bmart Saturday, Mar 21 1998 11:18AM ET
Reply # of 54887
Mr. Martin,
My understanding of the situation was determined from my very comfortable front row seat. And as a member of the audience I have watched this saga unfurl.
I can, with reasonably good conscious, deduce that you are conducting yourself in a manner that would appear very suspicious. I am not a detective, but I would think you would be considered the #1 suspect in this mystery.
Mr. Reece was a very late arrival to this play and brings with him heavy baggage. It still confounds me as to why he has yet to apply his noble principles to the Green Oasis mess he made. I see him as the tragic figure in this play. He will eventually get his due and the audience will applaud loudly.
I see the heros of the story have gone into seclusion, but, as any great story ends, I would assume they will arise from the ashes to claim their victory.
Now, back to our play!
RB
Individuals can be fooled...
Message 3791076
<s>
To: David R who wrote (44204)
From: bmart Saturday, Mar 21 1998 5:41PM ET
Reply # of 54887
David R.
How flattering to think you find me a part of a conspriacy! You have given me much enjoyment. I humbly apologize if I came off as crass. No, I am not a shareholder or affiliated with Rocky Mountain Ltd. in any way.
This ensemble has entertained me from last August. I followed along like the ladies at the office follow their soaps. I believe I have defined the protagonists and the antagonists accordingly.
Forgive me, I like the movies where the underdogs win. I am rooting for the underdogs here.
I believe I have kept matters in context, I follow my intuition which tells me some people are much too involved here to pretend to have just a casual relationship this venture.
Good day
RB
Message 3797777
Shame...
Message 3804918
Message 3805096 |
