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.

Technology Stocks : FRANKLIN TELECOM (FCM) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Bruce Hoyt who wrote (1338)	7/11/1999 12:32:00 AM
From: lostmymoney	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 2891

Bruce, Did they bring up the subject at all concerning shareholder value? And, if so, what they were doing about it? Thanks Mike

To: Bruce Hoyt who wrote (1338)	7/11/1999 12:24:00 PM
From: Noneyet	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 2891

Again, I 'm asking you to leave your childish remarks at home where they belong. That's the reason SI has some ground rules. They do not belong here period. Who might I ask, do you suppose is paying me ?????? While you are attempting to figure that out, and back up the ridiculous statement you made, ( even with a WAG ) check the short interest in fcm. You will have a hard time attributing my presence here to MM's who are short, or any other nonsense that has been heard on franklin's threads for years. Or would you like to claim I work for fcm's competition, and who might that be; Csco, Lu, Nortel??? That is another irresponsible statement on your part. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Not all of us get paid for hanging out here 7 days a week, 18 hours a day to trash other people's investments for the purpose of driving the price downward (stock manipulation I do believe). >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> As for your other comments below being accurate, I suggest you read back through some of them. Your opinion of two and one half years ago could not have been more wrong. However, to you that is immaterial, hence you reference rehashing the past. The best part of your succinct analysis then and now, is franklin's performance vs the markets. You were also very wrong regarding dctc, were you not ??? The link to your post Dec. 1996 is below. exchange2000.com >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Yes, I read Temp's post and the mysterious unsigned letter he received. Most of it is someone's interpretation of what they saw and heard. I disagree with most of their observations but at least whoever it was did show up and try to find out what's happening, unlike others who just rehash old, old stuff that's meaningless now. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Lastly, it is my opinion that if fcm had the goods to announce preliminary sales results as in the last quarters announcement, made on Apr. 6, 1999, that would have been done already. If revenues have increased from last quarter, where is that announcement. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Do I have any idea how last quarter went? Yes again! I quizzed all the FCM/FNet officers and employees present at the SHM and working at Franklin about many subjects including that one. Anyone with a calculator who listened to the shipping details & policy and minutes per month from various customers could easily figure out within a few bucks where we ended up for revs. You can wait for the official news :-) >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I see you offered no figures in your above statement . Without fail that must be addressed by company sooner or later, unless you would like to be bold enough to tell us the final figure on your calculator ????