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.

Gold/Mining/Energy : PYNG Technologies -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: HotShot1 who wrote (4051)	6/25/1999 2:23:00 PM
From: Chris L.	Respond to of 8117

Looks like the ask at these cheap levels is almost all dryed up. Now, for some good news from the expo such as a fund taking an interest in the company and beginning to accumulate a position and we will have a nice quick rebound back over $2 quite quickly and easily.... Mr. Jacobs: News for the show? Feedback received. Any news on the manufacturing front? Cheers, Chris

To: HotShot1 who wrote (4051)	6/25/1999 2:57:00 PM
From: AriKirA	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 8117

HotShot1, Not quite sure why you are trying to link my post to ASO. I never implied that that was the case! Yes, I initially posted the link to make sure ASO was aware that such actions were possible. However, it was never my intention to compare any of those suits with a possible suit against ASO or anyone for a matter of fact. Ed, just took note of my post and mentioned it a few posts ago, thus I wanted to forward him a link to a thread where he could keep himself up to date in this regard. I just thought it would be interesting to post an Off Topic link to ignite some discussion on the subject since the thread was quite dead. FYI I do not see any comparison whatsoever. A lawsuit at this stage would be a total waste of time, money and credibility. The only person that would look bad would be the company. IMO A serious company would ignore such events and continue conducting business as if nothing had happened. Since I am of the opinion that the Defendant's will prevail in the above mentioned case, I must submit that a fortiori Pyng would not have a chance against ASO if such was their intention, which I personally doubt. You are not the only one that followed up on his posts. I actually defended PYNG because ASO was posting said messages for specific reasons that I do not want to discuss. It was obvious that said individual did not know the company and had just stumbled upon some information that he thought he might benefit from. He didn't expect people such as Jack, and a couple of others, to intervene and help people realize that this individual was full of contradictions. With all due respect, I am not quite sure what your intention was with your last post, but FYI you didn't let me know anything. I am a securities lawyer who analyzes and foresees situations such as the one you refer to in your post every other day, so I am more than convinced that I am capable of coming to such a conclusion without the help of a poster who posts under the alias HotShot. If you didn't have an underlying motive, than my apologies. However, I didn't appreciate the tone of your post! Hmmmmmmm, member since June 24, 1999..... Defending ASO.... Posting under the alias Hotshot ('A Special One' vs 'Hotshot') Where do you guys come up with these names .... Could it be that... Nah, can't be! Or could it? AK