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 : Global Platinum & Gold (GPGI) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Ed Fishbaine who wrote (11859)	10/20/1999 4:14:00 PM
From: Richard Mazzarella	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 14226

Ed, Thanks for the important information <<The plant is being built and has been upgraded in size in order to operate not as a pilot plant but commerically. This plant is expected to be ready in 6-8 weeks he tells me.>> Maybe this is the problem? Jensen said that a turnkey plant would be delivered in less than 2 weeks from now. Now they are telling people 6-8 weeks, failure to deliver on expectation again! How long can people continue to support a company that constantly tells mistruth? I suspect that's the current problem, but could be wrong. I will comment on the other issues you addressed after some more consideration. Thanks again for your information.

To: Ed Fishbaine who wrote (11859)	10/20/1999 4:18:00 PM
From: Alan Vennix	Respond to of 14226

Ed, There may be some basis in fact to what you are theorizing. Not sure that they would have to get Jensen involved if they worked through some "less than honest" MM's, which we know are all out there. They may not get controlling interest, per se, but they would be in a significant ownership position. Look at the trading activity of the past few days. For most of the time there appeared to actually be more buying than selling. And after a particularly strong group of buys, along would come a "sell" for 100 shares to make the last trade appear that the price was down. The MM's kept the ask down in the face of buying and took it through several "trigger points" for stop/loss activity - look what happenned when it finally hit 0.05 - selling came out of the woodwork. In the end there was much more buying than selling at 0.052 but no increase in ask. Looks fishy to me. Alan

To: Ed Fishbaine who wrote (11859)	10/20/1999 4:27:00 PM
From: Scott Wheeler	Respond to of 14226

Ed, thanks very much for gathering that information. SW

To: Ed Fishbaine who wrote (11859)	10/20/1999 4:29:00 PM
From: Zeev Hed	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 14226

Ed, Bruce just mentioned CTYS in his post to me, and your story is exactly the type of stories that were floating on CTYS's thread on the eve of its demise. Explain to me, if all you say is true, than why should not that deep pocket sugar daddy pick up the pieces left over from IPMCF and CHIP (and who knows who else in the dirts), buy the technology from whomever that mysterious third party is and start from ground zero? Why pick up on poor old GPGI? Run the risk of an SEC probe, damage suits for stock manipulations and what not. Something else is at play, IMHO. By the way, over the last three years, how many of Twifford secret whispering in your ears came to fruition? Don't you think that it is quite possible that Twifford is self deluding himself and inadvertently misleading you again? Zeev

To: Ed Fishbaine who wrote (11859)	10/20/1999 4:34:00 PM
From: Thor Carlsen	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 14226

Thanks Ed. That puts GPGI and the Plant on Jan 2000. Checks coming first week of operation. Sounds good to me. Why wouldn't the Plant and it's Engineers be the takeover target? If I was a big miner from Russia I would be after the "process". Thor

To: Ed Fishbaine who wrote (11859)	10/20/1999 7:25:00 PM
From: Richard Mazzarella	Respond to of 14226

Ed, <<He refused to tell me anything about the arrangement between GPGI and this company.>> It's probably worthwhile looking under every piece of litter for some answers. I wonder if the cost of the plant are shares tied to Global's price? Could the company's new friends be working the stock lower? I also know that Global has been looking for a buyer, maybe they found one, one that wants to buy Global much cheaper. IMO if they eventually do a reverse, 2 cents for Global is too expensive. Reverse splits on non earning companies are always a disaster for the stock price. I think the only hope here is <<I spoke with Twiford today and he tells me neither he, nor any other insider knows where the selling is coming from. He also tells me that he is absolutely convinced that with the new process the company will be in a cash flow position as soon as the plant is installed and operating.>> and <<Twiford has also assured me, without documenting his belief, that there will be no bankruptcy and reorganization because no matter the share price Global will have the funds to continue until cashn flow begins.>> That's the bet I'm making.

To: Ed Fishbaine who wrote (11859)	10/21/1999 7:38:00 AM
From: bconard	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 14226

Ed, I know that this is not in Twiford's area, but did you ask him about the 'fully reporting' situation? At this point, we are 41 days away from the deadline and pink is not my color of choice! Bob

To: Ed Fishbaine who wrote (11859)	10/22/1999 9:20:00 AM
From: Richard Mazzarella	Respond to of 14226

Ed, another comment to your post <<Once a reorganization is announced the shares will cease trading.>> Not necessarily. MGAU was a merger of two garbage companies that had 100MM plus shares. They did a reverse split at the time of the merger, but each of the stocks traded prior to the actual announced merger. The equivalent presplit price for MG exceeded $5/share, the highest its ever been. Global may be working a similar plan, the weakness in stock shown by those in the "know". I would think that our share grubbing CEO would want to protect his interests and shareholder value, also the interests of his employees who are probably shareholders. If what you told us is the fact, that Global can become income producing on the turnkey startup and Global has no debt, there isn't any reason to merge or sell out. I'm a bit confused by the information and the behavior of the stock, inconsistent.