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 : TSIG.com TIGI (formerly TSIG) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Suzanne Newsome who wrote (39975)	3/4/2000 1:03:00 PM
From: Ditchdigger	Respond to of 44908

<It has also been widely reported that Gordon strongly resents the short-term traders who have played with this stock> Of which he appears to be one of those short term traders..How many options and restricted shares has he converted and sold over the last 2 years,,30MM+?Perhaps he resents it as competition?

To: Suzanne Newsome who wrote (39975)	3/4/2000 1:11:00 PM
From: V$gas.Com	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 44908

And you believe Gordon? After all of his BS? Say? Whatever happened to the Alexander Haig interview? I can't even find the PR concerning that. Can you? News to be announced hinted at? Is that legal? If this stock stays in the .40 to .50 range before the shareholders meeting, I will come back and eat all of my words. But, take a look at the chart over the past month. Nice downward trend. If this stock does MORE than a 1:10 RS it is more than likely doomed. Under SEC rules, TSIG can disclose the general terms of the financing package. Why won't they????????

To: Suzanne Newsome who wrote (39975)	3/4/2000 4:39:00 PM
From: ztect	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 44908

Suzanne................................ Have you ever spoken with RG on the phone or in person? Have you ever heard him in person? Have you ever directly talked to Paul Henry about Rg's personality? When you get information written second hand, you get that information through the lenses of the person who delivered it. Body language is lost when conversations aren't face to face. Intonations, inflections, and nuances are difficult to reflect in transcripts but can change the meanings of words, sentences and thoughts. Some people miss the sarcasm in one's voice. Others mistake or record stated intentions or goals as events soon to transpire. Paul Henry has told me even of conversations he has had with you, that in his opinion, didn't accurate reflect what he said to you. Now W. has written reports that are helpful, but should also be taken with a grain of salt. Some healthy skepticism is warranted of his reports especially in lieu of his prior reports that noted specific events that never transpired and also over stated the anticipated results of those deals that did occur. His statements about "reading" about the immediate success of the LL arrangement last fall is an example that quickly comes to mind. From my knowledge of RG's mannerisms through my few interactions with him, I'd surmise that RG spoke of deals that if they occurred could raise the share price, and could generate significant traffic and revenues. Numbers may have been glibly associated without the thought they'd be recorded or goals may have just transcripted as events soon to transpire. From the report, RG sounds like he had a very difficult time containing his seemingly never ending enthusiasm especially due to what we'd all like to believe are pending and forthcoming deals with UCP affiliates and other new corporate partners. I wasn't in the room, so until I ask the questions myself, I don't necessarily accept any answers. Even after I get the first hand response, I ask follow up questions to make sure I get less equivocal answers. Now when one purposely promotes because of hopefully just genuine enthusiasm, that person doesn't necessarily assume any responsibilty unless that person disseminates information that could be considered privileged . When someone obtains info through his due diligence that hasn't been publicilly been disclosed, that person according to SEC regs can't trade on that info or share it with anyone else that trades on that info. If I told an audience of just one person, say my girl friend, to buy a stock because such and such a deal is about to occur, I technically violate SEC regs. Someone sitting in their home office may not realize they are disseminating information to a world wide audience. Many are familiar with the many slap suits by companies against message board participants for libel. The damage amounts has been so large since the audiences effected are world wide. Many may also be aware of the suits against stock promotion news letters and individuals like Tokyo Joe that didn't properly disclose shares they received and scalped. The SEC has also had a case or two against people unrelated to companies that initiated rumors to pump share prices to trade into. Consequently, anyone with info that can be construed as privileged either for or against has to be extremely careful and, at times, purposely vague about what they know and share especially on message boards because of these boards reach. Whatever one's good or bad intentions, one opens oneself not only to praise, attention or opprobrium from sharing info good and bad, but also to a degree of culpability especially if he relays accurately or inaccurately information that never transpires. So some shouldn't dismiss criticisms. Some should not not understand skeptical reactions, and some should be a bit more prudent. Finally, others should learned to be tight lipped even when they want to smile. z