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: JACK R. SMITH JR. who wrote (11979)	10/23/1999 10:33:00 PM
From: d:oug	Respond to of 14226

Jack, I think that your comments might help us to understand this... <<...the blind men describing an elephant...>> Ed. as to focus on what we know using Zeev's The Trend Is Your Friend concept in reverse. Jensen's past trend to me is as follows: - Jensen sees Global as his domain past present and future - Jensen went public to obtain investment money - Jensen's only relationship to shareholders is thru gpgi shares - Jensen will make Global a success so that it will continue - as for protecting shareholder value, to Jensen yes BUT - the BUT to Jensen is Global will continue, thus gpgi shares continue - BUT the value of a gpgi share IS NOT Jensen's concern - Jensen's # 1 Task = make Global successful - Jensen does NOT see initial investments as differ than present ones - once Global successful then a gpgi share worth lots - Jensen sees NO PROBLEM with dilution of current shareholders - dilution to make Global successful = Good Business Practice - after dilution Global has new money and Delivers The Promise - Promise = Global mine prescious metals Big Time Very Good - if initial gpgi share diluted 100 to 1, not Jensen's concern - Jensen & Friends already have huge amounts of shares also from Ed.'s post <<Pure speculation ... Jensen ... connections in Belgium>> also, i have lost track of info from official update and from threaders thoughts and from Twiford's might or did say off the record. but, update said 2 weeks to small/test/pilot plant this cost = $150,000 now, from where = ?, to leap frog the 2 week test plant and go for a bigger type small production one in 2 months but now cost = ??????? and its 2 or 3 or 5 times more $$$ so if so then need big new money and ..... i have no facts just babble doug

To: JACK R. SMITH JR. who wrote (11979)	10/23/1999 10:55:00 PM
From: d:oug	Respond to of 14226

Jack, I just did an Edit on my just prior post 10:48 pm est. But I wonder. 1. If Global was already making money then would Jensen's responsibility to shareholders be only to increase share value, which has in itself the continuation of the company. 2. But at present with Global not having an income mean that Jensen's responsibility to shareholders is only to bring Global to having an income, and this without regards to share value ??? If so, then Jensen only has to protect the continuation of a gpgi share, and not its value. So dilution ok. doug