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 : Zia Sun(zsun) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Francois Goelo who wrote (4579)	10/4/1999 1:24:00 PM
From: StockDung	Respond to of 10354

Silly Tout!! Nobody believes you. Everyone knows your true motives when it comes to you touting ZSUN stock.

To: Francois Goelo who wrote (4579)	10/4/1999 1:29:00 PM
From: StockDung	Respond to of 10354

Turd Worshippers's standard responses to short-sellers Volume I: 1. Big news on the way, better cover now 2. You can have unlimited losses 3. I am going to turn you into the SEC 4. The company is going to sue you 5. I talked with the company, and they said you are wrong 6. All that is old news 7. Financial statements just reflect the past, I am investing for the future 8a. I am a long-term investor and don't care that the stock is down today 8b. The stock is up today, so that proves you are wrong 9. They have the patents that control this market 10. Everyone call in their Certificates, and we will have a squeeze 11. Nobody cares about the failures and convictions management had in the past, this time is different 12. This stock could go to a hundred 13. I hear (fill in the name of larger broker) is sniffing around and will soon pick up coverage. 14. AOL/MSFT/INTC/YHOO might buy them 15. The analyst is not influenced by investment banking relationships/warrants/cheap stock 16: This pullback is just a buying opportunity. 17: Only the weak hands are selling. 18: You will never see prices this low again, better cover. 19: You fool, earnings and revenues don't matter for internet stocks. 20: So, what if they are losing money, look how much AMZN lost. 21: A high short interest is good, cause they must eventually cover and buy more. 22: Herb Greenburg is being paid by (Rocker Partners, Mr. Pink, etc. etc.) 23. I called my sister and her broker said there is a buyout coming,, better cover now. 24. YADA YADA YADA 25. You can't hurt me, I bought back at $n. (related to 8a) 26. This is just manipulation by the market makers. 27. Short-selling is anti-free enterprise. 28. You sound like you're about to panic. 29. You're just trying to drive the price down so you can buy in cheaply. 30. You obviously haven't done any DD. 31. Getting a little nervous about your short position? 32. The shorts are worried. 33. Looks like a short squeeze! 34. Stop looking in the rear-view mirror. 35. You don't know the facts. 36. I'm forwarding your comments to investor relations. Better get a lawyer! 37. My sources tell me that major news is coming next week. Better cover shorts! 38. The company has no overhead, it will be pure profit! 39. The potential market for <name of scam product here> is <umpteen>,000,000 <units> x <umpteen>,000,000,000 <other units>. 40. These are old quarter results. They have to invest in their technology and will continue to lose money until they have a critical number of markets. Look at Quest, QCOM and MCI during their growth phase.

To: Francois Goelo who wrote (4579)	10/4/1999 4:04:00 PM
From: Sir Auric Goldfinger	Respond to of 10354

Hey MoFo, are you going to do any analysis as to why ZSUN's financials are different on their site versus the SEC filings? Or do you not know Or has Cragun not told you yet Or are you a liar?

To: Francois Goelo who wrote (4579)	10/4/1999 5:26:00 PM
From: StockDung	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 10354

Some case law for Francois about two CRIMs from TMRT which I happened to be very knowledgeable about. www1.bluemountain.com "The Supreme Court has dismissed a defamation lawsuit brought by a Las Vegas developer against the Las Vegas Business Press. In a ruling last Wednesday, the Supreme Court unanimously decided Steven Reibel did not have grounds to sue the Business Press because an article about him included minor errors" The developer actually had 13 active lawsuits against him. The court ruled the article was "substantially true," despite the inaccuracy because the fact he had 13 lawsuits "would not have a different effect on the mind of the reader." Earlier, District Judge Stephen Huffaker had made a summary judgment in favor of the Business Press, its former managing editor, Aaron Cohen, and reporter Paula Yakubik. But the court reversed Huffaker's decision requiring Reibel and Gem to pay $113,000 in attorneys' fees to the Business Press. CARSON CITY -- The Supreme Court has dismissed a defamation lawsuit brought by a Las Vegas developer against the Las Vegas Business Press. In a ruling last Wednesday, the Supreme Court unanimously decided Steven Reibel did not have grounds to sue the Business Press because an article about him included minor errors. In a July 1995 story, the Business Press reported there were 18 active lawsuits against Reibel, chairman of Gem Homes. Judges said there was no evidence Reibel filed a frivolous lawsuit that was meant to harass the Business Press. "Moreover, the fact that (Reibel and Gem) filed a defamation claim even though (the Las Vegas Business Press) published a retraction is not evidence of bad faith," according to the court. Therefore, justices ruled Reibel was not responsible for attorneys' fees.