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: AriKirA who wrote (4328)	8/15/1999 1:23:00 AM
From: Gary H	Respond to of 8117

Ari, Count me in.

To: AriKirA who wrote (4328)	8/15/1999 2:17:00 AM
From: Edward W. Richmond	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 8117

Ari, My opinion on the re-pricing is well known. I'm in on trying to have the decision negated. This does not imply any doubt about the future of FAST1 or management's ability to get it successfully to market. I see re-pricing of options, both the first and now this second one, as a violation of what to me is a basic principle. Thanks, Ari. Best regards, Ed

To: AriKirA who wrote (4328)	8/15/1999 8:44:00 PM
From: Jack Rayfield	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 8117

Ari I have at least two other investors that will sign and maybe as many as five (I have not talked to the other three but they bought on my recommendation and will probably follow my lead). Will the number of shares represented be a determining factor of how much weight it will carry? The two shareholder I have talked to own about 46K shares (my mom and dad). If the number is more critical I can probably find a number of people to sign that own 2-3K shares. Let me know your opinion. I like the proactive approach better than complaining anyway. Thanks Ari for taking the bull by the horns and jump starting this effort.