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 : ECNC (OTC:BB) - eConnect -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Ken O'Connor who wrote (7798)	3/24/2000 10:21:00 AM
From: Mama Bear	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 18222

Ken, can you find one on this list that has recovered? Just one? sec.gov Regards, Barb

To: Ken O'Connor who wrote (7798)	3/24/2000 10:42:00 AM
From: Erik Lundby	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 18222

The reason I am here is not because I have money to lose. I have never shorted ECNC. The reason I have hung around here is because of the story and the Fraud. You wagered once on a company accused of fraud and lost. If you wish to wager again on my motivations for being here I would be happy to oblige. Let me know and I will set it up. Do you wan't to back up your assertion that the only reason one would be here is because they have money on the line to lose? I came because I shorting oppportunity in a company in a company that was doing all kinds of hairy things. I did not get a short off in time before the halt. I stayed because I will see this story play out and find the behavior despiccable. Ken you said "You know very well that ECNC has NOT been proven of guilt, only charged, BIG BIG BIG difference DUDE." Ken there really is no big difference in this case. The SEC says they commited fraud. I know you you would rather believe the company than the SEC as the company has so much credibility. Maybe if you can come up one instance, (even one, surely there must be one, or will ECNC be the first) where the SEC has accused a company of fraud and it did not make a difference to stock price. You and others have implied that shorts should not be believed because they stand to gain financially. Well heres a shocker, so do company officials so you really should take them out of your list of credible sources if standing to gain makes someone unworthy of being listened to. Why don't you check with ex. employees, ex accountants, ex so called strategic alliance partners, the transfer agent. All these people are contactable and that is where DD should be done. Erik

To: Ken O'Connor who wrote (7798)	3/24/2000 4:15:00 PM
From: Pluvia	Read Replies (6) \| Respond to of 18222

March 23, 2000 SEC Files Lawsuit Against eConnect For Allegedly Defrauding Investors By AARON ELSTEIN THE WALL STREET JOURNAL INTERACTIVE EDITION Ten days after suspending trading in eConnect Inc. shares, the Securities and Exchange Commission sued the company for allegedly defrauding investors. The suit, filed Thursday in federal court in Los Angeles, contends that eConnect and its president, Thomas S. Hughes, tried to inflate the company's stock price by disseminating false and misleading press releases. According to the suit, eConnect issued a fraudulent press release Feb. 28 announcing a "strategic alliance" with Empire Financial Group, a Longwood, Fla., brokerage firm. The SEC alleges there was no alliance, but rather a "nonbinding letter of intent" between Empire and a joint venture partner of eConnect. The commission added that a draft press release indicated that eConnect and Empire had signed a "letter of intent," but the wording was changed after Mr. Hughes reviewed it. The SEC also says that the company issued a fraudulent release March 3 stating that eConnect and a partner had established a "unique licensing agreement" with Palm Inc. The release was issued one day after Palm's highly-publicized spin-off from 3Com Corp. The SEC says "Hughes knew that there was no unique licensing arrangement with Palm." The SEC says that eConnect distributed the fraudulent press releases through Business Wire, and posted them on its Web site and on the stock-chat site, Raging Bull. The commission alleges the false press releases caused the price of eConnect's shares, which are quoted on the OTC Bulletin Board, to soar from $1.375 to over $21.875 in two weeks before the SEC suspended trading in the stock March 13. Mr. Hughes, 52 years old, couldn't be reached Thursday, and Michael Sitrick, a spokesman for eConnect, declined to comment because he hadn't seen a copy of the lawsuit. Based in San Pedro, Calif., eConnect makes financial-transaction software and has an online gaming unit, according to the SEC. Investors were alerted to eConnect's rising stock price and press releases days before the SEC suspended trading in the stock. Anthony Elgindy and a person who goes by the name of Steve Pluvia issued separate reports March 10 urging investors to sell their shares because they said the company had issued "false, misleading" press releases, including one about an alleged alliance with Empire Financial. Their work was the subject of an article in the online Journal last week. eConnect issued a press release Monday saying it had hired a lawyer "to provide legal as well as corporate governance counsel" and a public relations firm, which would write, review, and approve all press releases. "This should help ensure that the company's releases are clear and accurate," Mr. Hughes said. On Thursday, eConnect issued another release saying that Stephen E. Pazian had been named president and chief operating officer of the company, effective immediately, and was seeking a chief financial officer. Mr. Hughes remains as chairman and chief executive. Mr. Pazian said, "eConnect must immediately free up Tom's time, so that he can concentrate exclusively on implementing his global vision for eConnect." This isn't the first time a company run by Mr. Hughes has had difficulties with the SEC. In March 1999, the commission filed an action against Betting Inc., whose president was Mr. Hughes, for failing to file an annual and quarterly report. Betting Inc. consented to "permanent injunctive relief." Betting Inc. later changed its name to eConnect.