Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

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 : MIDL .... A Real Sleeper -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Ga Bard who wrote (5815)	6/8/1999 1:53:00 PM
From: The Devil Dog	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 7039

If they go private, that will longer be the case. It will bring in more investors and more money though if we can get a good company in here. You can't blame people for not exercising their warrants when all that hallabullou was going on. It was mostly professionals doing the arbitraging. Best Regards

To: Ga Bard who wrote (5815)	6/8/1999 1:57:00 PM
From: Kurt N	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 7039

I think the best scenario for all parties is as follows: #0: Get something of substance in the shell. #1: Get MIDL trading (and have MIDLP and MIDLW not trading ever, which is simply a matter of Midland not submitting paperwork required for the MM's to make a market in MIDLP and MIDLW) #2: Increase authorized shares of MIDL (at shareholder meeting) to allow for exercising of the MIDLW and conversion of the MIDLP. #3: Since MIDLW is not trading, there can be no momentum trading (one of the things that you dislike). Also it is next to impossible to use the warrants for arbitrage since that would mean the arbitrager would have to buy a MIDLW (but they can't since there is no market for it) for each MIDL that they shorted. #4: If something of value came in (see #0) then all the warrants would get exercised (by exising warrant holders) quickly at $.50/warrant (giving MIDL enough assets regardless of what was brought in by the merger/aquisition to meet Nasdaq listing requirement) Kurt

To: Ga Bard who wrote (5815)	6/8/1999 2:44:00 PM
From: one_less	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 7039

I am not following you. I bought warrants because they were offered at the reduced exercise rate of $.50. These were the terms under which they were offered and sold. I did exercise some at a time when I know other people were doing the same. The arbitrage appeared to cause momentum and also damage the commons share price. They can't be raised to $5.00 unless the company or somebody wants to buy them back from me first. I bought them on these terms and have not agreed to new terms. There is the difference. They were dropped to $.50 because the company, existing warrant holders and new buyers had no problem with the terms. I am pretty sure we will have see major rebellion here if you try to make people pay 10X what they were told they would have to pay after they have already made their purchase. Why would you of all people want to suggest opening another avenue for shareholder greivance.