Georgia Bard's Corner 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.

Pastimes : Georgia Bard's Corner

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next

To: Ga Bard who wrote (3857)	7/20/1998 12:45:00 AM
From: Dusty	Read Replies (1) of 9440

Gary, Regarding paying by credit card; the goodies would have been considered paid for UP- FRONT and the consumer would be free to leave with their purchase. Payment via credit card would be no problem because the merchant would seek payment from the bank the card is issued on. Point is they were paid for PRIOR to the goodies being removed from the store. You seem to have gone off subject and on some other band wagon; I know not of... What does monthly payments of the credit card bill have to do with being illegal? Does not equate for me. This statement makes no logical sense whatsoever. Your statement: <<You do not like it that people can proof news releases or promote a stock and be paid for their services. They can and do on a regular basis because the laws say they can.>> What has this got to do with the current discussion? Is there something I am missing here? However, seeing how you brought up the subject of company press releases; would it not be more accurate to state draft and / or edit? Without full disclosure of someone's position with a company and an existing contract; yes, I would have a problem with it. Anyone, who is contracting with a company to provide the above services as well as posting to Internet threads, would IMHO constitute an insider; due to the need of prior "inside" information needed to draft or edit press releases. In my opinion, (not legal); only by disclosing involvement with the company could it be totally honest and up-front. I know from all your posts the issue of "honesty" is a strong point with you as well. <<WHat they cannot do is say or advise people to buy when they are selling or to trade their payment of shares based on inside information.>> There are many ways of "suggesting" that stock be purchased without actually saying " LAST TRAIN OUT; BETTER BUY NOW" anyone who reads the threads on the Internet realizes this. Shareholders have no way of knowing if an insider is buying or selling unless the proper documents were filed with the SEC. You are better versed with this issue than I; but I did think that there was a document that had to be filed stating intent to buy or sell "prior" to actually doing so; is this correct? <<Most of the time when you get stock of this nature there is a contract signed sealed and delivered with the conditions and terms prior to then the certificate is issued.>> I am baffled by this statement regarding a signed sealed and delivered contract; with terms and conditions prior to certificate being issued. I am somewhat confused. Are you telling us that it is acceptable for someone to accept a contract and be compensated by a company that they are posting for (promoting)without disclosing this information to the shareholders on the thread? I am not an attorney and therefore am not qualified to address this issue from a legal stand point. I can only address it on a personal level; you are correct in thinking I have a problem with this scenario. Thanks, Dusty

Report TOU Violation

Share This Post

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next