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 : PanAmerican BanCorp (PABN) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Howard C. who wrote (40474)	8/18/1999 7:35:00 PM
From: Howard C.	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 43774

I AM SHOCKED TO SEE SUCH THINGS EXIST AS THIS: Four men charged in Internet stock promotion scheme HAUPPAUGE, N.Y. (AP) - Four men were arrested by federal authorities Wednesday on charges they used Internet Web sites and e-mail newsletters to try to drive up the stock values of eight companies through misleading information. The four were charged in a two-count indictment in U.S. District Court in Hauppauge with conspiracy to commit securities fraud and conspiracy to commit money laundering. U.S. Attorney Loretta E. Lynch said the case was striking because it demonstrated how traditional boiler room securities fraud schemes had moved to cyberspace. The defendants were accused of reaching hundreds of thousands of potential investors through the Internet. ``The defendants were able to manipulate stock supply and prices without hiring large staffs of brokers, traders and cold callers to do their bidding,' she said in a statement. ``This perverse abuse of the immense communicative power of the Internet should act as a warning to all investors to be wary when relying on the accuracy of Internet investment recommendations,' she added. FBI Assistant Director Lewis Schiliro said the case should serve as a warning to the public. ``Caution should be the password used by all before logging on to cyberspace commerce,' he said. Three of those who were arrested and charged had been barred from the securities industry before. The indictment said the defendants promoted the eight companies through a Web site known as ``stockplayer.com' and through a related Internet investment newsletter known as ``Stockplayer.' The defendants allegedly misstated the financial results and business prospects of the companies it profiled. Prosecutors identified the four as Vincent Napolitano, 38, of Oyster Bay; Irving Stitsky, 45, of Brookville; Jordan Shamah, 41, of Westbury; and Robert Kessler, 40, of Syosset. If convicted, the four could face prison terms of up to 20 years on the most serious charge, along with millions of dollars in fines or restitution.

To: Howard C. who wrote (40474)	8/18/1999 8:22:00 PM
From: PCModem	Respond to of 43774

Hi Howard. What did the company say when you told them you want to examine the books? Did they refuse to attempt to accommodate you? As for why others have not requested to view the books, I cannot say for sure. I can guess though: Some are not worried about it. Others may have but know if they say anything here they will get attacked by j & c. Several people have stated they won't post here because of them... "Second, as far as suspensions hurting stockholders, duh, I suppose so, but in actuality, if a company reaches that point, then I do believe the SEC is trying to protect, not hurt, shareholders." Indeed. The key is "...if a company reaches that point..." Do you know what "that point" is? (I mean the actions of the company, not the reaction of the SEC). Somehow I don't think so. Before calling for a suspension you should know what kinds of things cause a suspension in trading. "What did you mean "the SEC does not agree?" How do you know that?" That was a response to something you said: "Your scenarios may be true, but another scenario is a suspension of trading based on all these unfulfilled promises/statements, which would be my third, a dubious distinction." www2.techstocks.com If the SEC did agree with you, they would suspend trading. However, "...unfulfilled promises/statements..." as that phrase applies to PABN is not a basis for suspending trading. Thus I said "the SEC does not agree" The SEC does not agree with what you think is a basis for suspending trading. If they did, they would suspend trading -- on PABN and probably 90% of all trading stocks, with the remaining 10% to soon follow. As for how do I know that? It's part of my job. Let's just say I know people who know people. Oh, and I do research including reading about companies that have been suspended and why they were suspended. If I understand you correctly two prior investments of yours have been suspended from trading. Howard, something is wrong here. I think you should reexamine your investment strategy, goals etc. I say that very sincerely and kindly. "It must be challenging to market beta products." Why must it be challenging? (or more challenging that one would normally expect?) I can see how it would be challenging if the products did not work, or if there was no real market for them. But I do not see any requirement that it must be challenging to market beta products. The volume was double today what it has been recently, and the stock moved up a bit. However, the volume was still less than 1% of the issued and outstanding. IMHO what happened today hardly qualifies as manipulation...What it suggests to me instead is that the MMs are paying attention this time. This could be very interesting indeed. PCM GO PABN!!!