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 (6371)	7/14/1999 8:01:00 PM
From: Joe Copia	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 7039

That is one hell of a letter . Bravo. Joe PTG&LI !!!

To: Ga Bard who wrote (6371)	7/14/1999 8:45:00 PM
From: Mark_H	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 7039

I don't believe that Mark Pierce is a Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) lawyer. Maybe just a securities lawyer?

To: Ga Bard who wrote (6371)	7/14/1999 9:01:00 PM
From: Shell Searcher	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 7039

Here you go Gary. As a friend and fellow Midland shareholder, here's some feedback: Style feedback: 1. Do not get personal with NASD, nor Merrill, nor DF. 2. FACTS over FEELINGS. If your angry, say so, then go back to facts. 3. Don't go into too much detail, especially personal details. Make your point in a clear and concise manner. 4. You do not need to defend yourself. You're coming across as defensive when you do. Let the truth speak for itself. 5. You're speaking for all Midland shareholders, not just yourself. Change "I" to "We" throughout. 6. You're attempting to provide a clear, concise reason why Midland should resume trading. Make a strong case. Be compelling. Content feedback: 1. Make the subject clear. Change "Ref: Unfair or improper business conduct" to something like "Ref: Resumption of Trading of Midland Inc". 2. Paragraph 1: Good intro. Clean, concise. 3. Paragraph 2-3: Delete? The personal details are obscuring the real reason for the letter -- resumption of Midland trading. We know you've been destroyed by Midland, but NASD probably doesn't need to know the details of the Midland saga. If you feel they're truly needed, put them as a separate attachment. Perhaps a chronicle of the events from your perspective. Keep the intro strong and concise. 4. Paragraph 4: Put a period after "have had to endure major losses". Delete the rest of the sentence about Internet voices? 5. Paragraph 5: Delete "However, the voices..." and remaining sentences. Too much detail? 6. Paragraph 6 and items 1-6: Perfect: Good, factual, clear, concise. 7. Paragraph 7 and items 1-10: - Item 3: Delete "... Merrill Lynch has a large influence over NASD..."? Remember, you're appealing to NASD management. - May want to tighten up the wording on the other items. 8. Paragraph 8: Delete everything after "for a current CEO"? Rest of the paragraph has information already found in Paragraphs 6-7. 9. Paragraph 9: Perfect! ANYONE SEE ANY OTHER OPTIONS??? - Change "no further action" to "no further legal action"? 10. Paragraph 10-11: Delete? 11. Paragraph 12: Good appeal to "do what is right". Carrot approach. 12. Paragraph 13: Potential legal remedies. Stick approach, Use with carrot approach above. 13. Paragraph 14 and following. Fine. Of course, you're free to ignore everything I just said!

To: Ga Bard who wrote (6371)	7/14/1999 9:38:00 PM
From: CharleyMike	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 7039

< wrongfully taken have been returned EXCEPT for those shares that we sold by > Shouldn't that we be a were? And, if you change "targeted SEC attorney " to "SEC targeted attorney, you might be more accurate. I don't think Mark was an SEC attorney. Damn few errors for a letter that long. Good show, Bard. edit: I see now you've got the SEC attorney thing handled.