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 (5833)	6/8/1999 4:22:00 PM
From: Binder	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 7039

Enough said! Amen! :-) Binder

To: Ga Bard who wrote (5833)	6/8/1999 4:22:00 PM
From: one_less	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 7039

Garbage!!! The terms and conditions for the warrants have been clearly spelled out. There is no need for shareholders with voting rights to suffer one bit. The Warrants were set up to bring additional income to the company without the need to issue additional stock. They were promoted for that reason. They were bought and held by me and others for that reason. <<Maybe the MM that is sponsoring the 15c211 on the common will refuse to do the warrants. >> well we can certainly see who is behind the screw job. Dan was in good company when he confided in you. No wonder he was such a dope and got caught so easily. Honor among theives and all. Now I get it. Your famous closing coment DON'T TRUST ANYBODY is supposed to be "I told you not to trust me."

To: Ga Bard who wrote (5833)	6/8/1999 4:36:00 PM
From: campe	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 7039

Gary, the fact of the matter is that whether someone is holding MIDL,P, or W , they all have a vested interest as "shareholders". Its been close to a year since MIDL was halted. At this point, we are all LONG term holders whether we like it or not. And since we're all long term holders, and most of us have mentally written this thing off, we should be able to live through another year until the W expire either converted or worthless. To call W holders "anticipated shareholders" is not right (although legally correct). The warrants exist and they may have been a mistake, but they do exist and many bought them because of the strike price being lowered. Changing the deal at this point is not right. How would you feel if the shareholders didn't vote for raising the authorized to allow for proper P conversion? How would you feel if they changed the P deal because of this? If the MM refuses to sponsor the 15c211, the W holders will just exercise (directly through the company and TA) at $0.50 without the W ever trading again. This is what Kurt suggested and does make sense (provided the shell gets filled). I would hate for this discussion to divide this group.