DCTC / FTEL / FNET 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.

Microcap & Penny Stocks : DCTC / FTEL / FNET

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next

To: Dan Duncan who wrote (1541)	10/18/1996 8:29:00 PM
From: Colin Cody	of 1624

Dan a few things. I called Joe Murphy on the telephone when Raleigh kept posting and posting and posting his questions (I guess Raleigh doesn't have a telephone??) and within hours I had the details up on P. Joe DID answer and I replied to Raleigh's specific requests, for which he posted THANK YOU on P... but then later on we see again SI postings of same stuff!!!??? So I don't blame you for being confused or in the dark, but it is NOT Joe Murphys fault. Lots of info on P. In short the "truth" is that "the contract" had an original expiration date of about 9/16/96. The "truth" that Raleigh asked about is if they were working on "a new contract" and the "truth" in fact is YES. As I understand it, and I'm not up to the "hour" here, Frank has some decisions to make re: the negotiation of a new contract. i.e. it's on Frank's desk "so to speak". This was all info I uncovered after reading several relentless posts asking why? when? where? etc. from several people. So I hope the above "truth" is what you are looking for. Keep in mind this isn't the "whole truth" it is just the "truth" that Raleigh and others have been posting about, and as such that's all I have addressed at their request. The "whole truth" should it fully understood (but since we aren't all corporate lawyers we can't) would make us say "who cares" with regards to the status of the above negotiations AS STATED. Here's WHAT IS OF INTEREST: Both parties to "the new contract" would like to modify their existing arrangement. On P I editoralize a little as to the reasons. But Here I'll just say Frank has HIS NEEDS and Joe has OTHER NEEDS. What is on the table is a verbalized NEGOTIATED arrangement. We will JUST HAVE TO WAIT until the two Companies come to some agreement to make A CHANGE. Otherwise we won't see a change, and therefore we have no right to expect a news release! I suspect we WILL see a Joint News Release about this matter... Hope this answers ALL THE QUESTIONS AND DOUBTS... Colin

Report TOU Violation

Share This Post

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next