To: ztect who wrote (40103 ) 3/7/2000 8:57:00 AM From: ztect Respond to of 44908
In response to Thomas Bishop on RB.............. Stating that TSIG has a done deal or a rumored deal is "true" as just occurred with mrEzE on RB goes well beyond any fine lines of rumor and speculation. Saying it would be interesting "if" or what "if" or shouldn't tsig do a deal "with" is a lot different then saying that "the deal with 'xxxx' is 'true'" or "real". To me the distinction is quite obvious. Now a person may learn info prior to public release through a number of channels (eg. someone related in the other company). But possessing that knowledge isn't the problem. Sharing it is. Anyone unfamiliar with insider trading restrictions and SEC trading regulations should read some judgements made against those who've traded on inside info. (Some recent judgements for review) sec.gov sec.gov sec.gov Disseminating info that comes true that just one person buys, sells or trades on prior to public disclosure of said info constitutes insider trading. Disseminating info and using very specific language like "true" and "real" that doesn't comes true that just one person buys, sells or trades on prior to public disclosure of said info constitutes fraud. Anyone remember the idiots saying they heard through so and so that you better buy now because a certain jungle is going to take over a little you know who? "Rumors" and outright declarations that come true make the company looked bad due to the perception of purposely leaking info. "Rumors" and outright declarations that don't come true make both sincere tsig shareholders and tsig.com look like hypsters. Furthermore, many arrangements are proposed, mtgs held, and negotiations started. But until the deal is "sealed", and announced, all that is "real", "true" or official is that humans, dogs, horses, and others species shiet. z