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 : XSNI - X-Stream Network -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Troutbum who wrote (2278)	7/22/1999 11:04:00 PM
From: Jacalyn Deaner	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 3519

Sherlock - Well, then you are NOT holding the parent company that Lucent is dealing with. Because, believe me, they ARE reporting to Lucent, that privately held company that is. And if you see my recent post-Lucent contact, there isn't going to be an IPO of XSNI nor is there any activity to move XSNI up the NASD - never was a mistake to be placed on the OTCBB - it had to be placed OTCBB - no financials and not significant nor worthy to be traded for anything more than pennies - had to be listed on OTCBB to get xstream canada, public documents say that is so. Your Feb 1999 version of the company stands as is FOR YOU THE IGNORANT INVESTOR; for Lucent - there is another version; BUT you are correct - they don't have to answer anything until the year 2000 for the ?stock? they listed - and you can see from the emails delivered - they have no intention of giving XSNI any weight now that other "parties" are watching. Why does so and so keep referring to that invalid Feb 1999 shareholder report? Can't be valid now that we know nothing is really accurate or did I make a mistake there too? Bloomberg said it all in its report with information from Paul Meyers. If they are not required to report, why can't they keep their mouths shut telling the shareholders what it isnt; why not just come out with the details that Lucent and Lehman's got. These are questions for you to ponder, Sherlock, and you need to grasp the implications before you graduate to Einstein Pre-Basics 101. I can't wait until you receive your April 30, 1999 shareholder report that was "on the presses" but got held up somewhere.... Now, what part of this post don't you get this time? I am beginning to think you really don't get it, tomorrow you get the bold and italic treatment to smarten you right up - important points will be enhanced for elucidation, real attention getter. You have discovered another point of this company Sherlock: This company is not required to report, it is traded publicly AND the parent company considers this a nonissue - XSNI is insignificant in the "privately held parent company". Don't you wonder how they got rid of Nethead right out from under XSNI - are they cleaning house while not required to report or what? No, XSNI is the software client with 5 programmers (maybe now 4) writing software for salaries the sole source of any revenue and their only client is their owner the privately held company Paul Meyers talked about with Bloomberg. TOS, POS whatever, face it, they don't give a crap what you think you have, as long as Lucent doesn't think they are holding the same thing. Put away your crayons Berwyn, I am not drawing up any more pictures for you tonight; if you can't see it in Weekly Reader format - you are in way over your head. Take it for what it is and play it for what it is - you are lucky it is this high of a price so enjoy it while you can - what can you provide to substantiate this price - that the company keeps saying it doesn't have to tell you anything, that nothing can be verified; that most of the pulp fiction in that Feb 1999 report is false or erroneous and misleading - that is worth 3 bucks to you? Hey, I have some stock to tell you about, send me the money quick, I'll give you the details in a year, man this is big, gonna be listed on the big boards too, soon as I get some minor listing problems fixed up, then we will IPO this sucker - but you get in now and you will RIDE to the SKY with this baby, there are big brokerage houses looking into the IPO, and I have contracts with someone big like IBM or Lucent; this is a great deal, you have my word on it, so nothing needs to be verified - you will know it all in a year. Deal for you - 2 bucks 1 buck less than XSNI today. Are you that easy Sherlock? Cuz this is exactly what your 5000 shares of XSNI represents; even less now that we know there is not going to be an IPO and Lucent is not interested in XSNI portion of the privately held company, and the company doesn't give a $hit if you know anything until 2000 or not. And don't forget if you try to validate or verify anything with the contacts mentioned in that Feb 1999 report always refererd to by so and so - you will get clobbered with the heavy handed tactics of intimidation and threats - real attention getters. I LEARNED MY LESSON - I AM NOT DOING ANYMORE DISCOVERY AND I AM NOT EMAILING ANYONE. NO MORE DD FOR ME. I am only answering a question about what don't I understand, and I can't think of anything I don't understand. But I know I have to wait until 2000 to find out for sure. This is not DD, this is an answer for the 100th time in a 100th way, without throwing the toaster at the questioner. Sherlock, you are getting pretty close to that jar of jelly on that there toast. No, it is not difficult to understand now is it Sherlock. Good night, Demi :)