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 : CDN. MOMO PUPPIES -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Buckey who wrote (3121)	7/11/1999 7:11:00 PM
From: PROBABILITE	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 36688

Thanks Buckey, this is more encouraging for me. PROBABILITE

To: Buckey who wrote (3121)	7/11/1999 10:23:00 PM
From: Ed Pakstas	Respond to of 36688

I don't know how many shares the others have but i do know that RIL only has about 3mm shares out...I should hope that it would hold it's 5 cents per share (pre-rollback value), although I don't know why..All the company appears to own is that POS SVB property... ...ed

To: Buckey who wrote (3121)	7/11/1999 10:36:00 PM
From: keith massey	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 36688

John... Just my take, but I think how a rollback effects a stock is highly dependant on how liquid it was before the rollback and what the insider or "smart money" hold. Illiquid stock often don't drop after rollbacks in my observations. This is because the insiders or "smart money" often still hold a big chunk and only did the rollback to draw in new investors and financing. In the case of liquid stocks the shareholders (retail public) are normally the ones to lose out when a rollback occurs. In most of these case the stock drops after the rollback. I know the shareholders of BSW or PUG (to name a couple of classic) will agree with me. Best Regards KEITH