SI
SI
discoversearch

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.
Technology Stocks : CSGI ...READY FOR TAKE-OFF!
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  
To: angel who wrote (2009)1/6/1998 3:16:00 PM
From: tech  Read Replies (2) of 3391
 
________To all ConSyGen Investors and Interested Parties.____________

It is now clear that the NASD review, by itself, can not prevent ConSyGen from getting a
NASDAQ listing. However, the results of this review may or may not have a influence on the
listing process.

It is my opinion that the outcome of this review WILL NOT have any influence on the NASDAQ
listing. I feel that this review was a routine review done by NASD and the fact that they have not
had any further communication with the company in over 8 months is important to note.

In the last week or two, you have seen the blatant attempts by Mr. Kevin Hansen and angel to
post false and misleading information regarding ConSyGen's ability to receive a NASDAQ listing
while this review is still pending.

Both Mr. Hansen and angel continually posted that the fact that ConSyGen has a pending review,
regardless of the outcome, was enough to prevent a NASDAQ listing.

Is has now become evident that both Mr. Hansen and angel were posting false and misleading
information. Angel even went as far as to "claim" he called NASDAQ and they informed him that
no company with a pending review would be approved.

It is now clear that angel purposely, knowingly, and intentionally posted false information
regarding this so-called conversation.

Even Mr. Hansen's own conversations with NASDAQ proved that angel's post regarding this
issue was a complete fabrication.

Now that the facts have become clear, Mr. Hansen has decided to back track and try to justify his
misleading and false posts by indicating he said "I believe" the NASD review would prevent the
listing." However when we check his original posts no such wording was used.

It should be very clear to everyone who reads this thread that both Mr. Hansen and angel have
consistenty posted false and misleading information.
Report TOU ViolationShare This Post
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  

HomeMailHotSubjectMarksPeopleMarksKeepersSettings
Terms Of UseContact UsCopyright/IP PolicyPrivacy PolicyAbout UsFAQAdvertise on SI
© 2025 Knight Sac Media.  Data provided by Twelve Data, Alpha Vantage, and CityFALCON News