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 : Zia Sun(zsun) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Sir Auric Goldfinger who wrote (9035)	7/30/2000 6:30:04 PM
From: StockDung	Respond to of 10354

WARNING ABOUT ZIASUN TECHNOLOGIES Shares are down 74.25% since January 1st 2000 If you invested $100 you have $25.75 left!

To: Sir Auric Goldfinger who wrote (9035)	7/30/2000 6:59:30 PM
From: StockDung	Respond to of 10354

Rule 128. Amendments to Notice or Answer; Dismissals (a) (Amendments) The masters, at any time prior to the conclusion of the hearing, or the commission, at any time prior to its determination, may allow or require amendments to the notice of formal proceedings and may allow amendments to the answer. The notice may be amended to conform to proof or to set forth additional facts, whether occurring before or after the commencement of the hearing. In case such an amendment is made, the judge shall be given reasonable time both to answer the amendment and to prepare and present his or her defense against the matters charged thereby. (b) (Dismissals by examiner) At any time after the filing of formal charges and before final disposition, where exigent circumstances prevent consideration by the full commission, the examiner, with the concurrence of the director/chief counsel and the chairperson, may dismiss any charge from the notice of formal proceedings, if it appears that the available evidence is insufficient to sustain the charge or that dismissal is otherwise in the interest of justice, and such dismissal is not tantamount to dismissal of the proceedings as a whole. courtinfo.ca.gov 128

To: Sir Auric Goldfinger who wrote (9035)	7/30/2000 7:04:27 PM
From: StockDung	Respond to of 10354

Rule 128. Correction and certification of record 2000 California Rules of Court Rule 128. Correction and certification of record (a) [Request for correction of record] Immediately on the completion of the clerk's and reporter's transcripts the clerk shall mail notice thereof to all parties, and within 10 days after mailing of such notice, any party may file a request for correction of such transcripts. If no request for correction is filed within such time, the clerk shall certify the record as correct. (b) [Hearing and certification] If any party files a request for correction of the transcripts within such time, the clerk shall set a time not more than 10 days thereafter for certification of the transcripts by the judge who tried the case, and shall give not less than 5 days' notice thereof by mail to all parties. At the time set or at the time to which the judge may continue the hearing, he shall determine the request for correction, and if none is allowed, shall certify the transcripts as correct. If corrections are allowed by the judge, he shall fix the time within which they shall be made by the clerk or reporter, and on the transcripts being corrected as directed, shall certify them as correct. If no time for correction is fixed by the trial judge, the corrections shall be made by the clerk or reporter within 30 days after their allowance. The parties at any time may stipulate that the whole or any portion of the record is correct, and such stipulation shall render unnecessary the certification by either the clerk or judge of the record or the portion stipulated to by the parties. Rule 128 as amended effective January 5, 1953. courtinfo.ca.gov

To: Sir Auric Goldfinger who wrote (9035)	7/30/2000 7:45:25 PM
From: StockDung	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 10354

TheTruthSeeker.com (TTS), July 30th 2000 announced that it is considering proposals received for the purchase of part of its e-commerce portal "BigAsia4Sale'' (www.bigasia4sale.com). The company has received letters of intent from Iaasic Onigwecher of Tortola and many other offshore entities. Offers for wholly-owned subsidiary BigAsia4Sale.com Ltd keep flowing in by the minute from venture capital firms and potential strategic partners involved in manufacturing in Asia. The board of directors, at its July 30th meeting in Newton, resolved to make a final decision on the sale within the next several weeks. What TheTruthSeeker will demonstrate from this potentially profitable sale of part of BIGAsia4Sale.com will be it's ability to identify and acquire competitive Internet businesses and then rapidly convert them into profitable entities that generate substantial returns. The company reported that its board of directors is presently evaluating and conducting due diligence regarding the various offers that were recently presented and believes a sale will generate between US$5.2 million and $20.5 million in cash to TheTruthseeker.com, depending on what percentage of the subsidiary is sold. It is the company's plan to retain a substantial portion of the subsidiary.

To: Sir Auric Goldfinger who wrote (9035)	7/30/2000 9:13:35 PM
From: StockDung	Respond to of 10354

InCreadible Investments LLC Starts Coverage of The Truthseeker.Com With A Strong Buy TheTruthseeker.com Business Plan Begins To Get Traction A Senior Investment Analyst for InCreadible Investments said, "when it comes to a good fraud no one knows more than The Truthseeker. Emphasizing the importance of getting into the scam early he went on to say, "anyone who liquidates all their other stock investments right now and puts the funds into a money market fund in anticipation of being able to invest in The Truthseeker.Com when they make their US Offering will not regret it". InCreadible Investments is still trying to figure out all of the numbers so was not prepared to make any income projections but was willing to state "there sure are a lot of numbers" and "with Truthseeker you don't have to worry about profits". An Industry observer observed that given the imminent demise of all the other business sectors the timing for a new "scams and frauds" sector couldn't be better. Another observred "What a strategy. do you know how people are in Asia-" It also has been clarified that not only will this stock be shortable right after the IPO it is going to be shortable before the IPO. This seemed to reflect Mr. Schneider's thinking that short sellers were an investors best friend. He is reported to have said that he felt that it was very important that every investor in The Truthseeker.Com have someone they can sell their stock to. Message 14134883

To: Sir Auric Goldfinger who wrote (9035)	7/31/2000 4:23:28 PM
From: StockDung	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 10354

FINAL JUDGMENT ENTERED AGAINST JOHN MANION IN INSIDER TRADING ACTION On July 21, the United States District Court for the District of Arizona entered a Final Judgment of Permanent Injunction and Other Relief (Final Judgment) against John R. Manion (Manion). The Final Judgment, entered pursuant to Manion's consent and without admitting or denying the allegations contained in the Commission's Complaint, enjoins Manion from future violations of the antifraud provisions of the federal securities laws. Manion is also required to pay $40,185.91 in disgorgement, prejudgment interest and civil penalties. The Commission's action was filed on June 22, 1999 against six defendants for insider trading in the stock of Bio-Dental Technologies Corp. (Bio-Dental) prior to the June 3, 1996 announcement that Zila, Inc. would acquire Bio-Dental. Named as defendants were Manion, Rocco J. Anselmo, James L. Rammelt, Ivan Kron, Donald S. Italia and William E. Sklar. Simultaneous with the filing of the Complaint, all of the defendants, except Manion, without admitting or denying the allegations, consented to the entry of judgments against them. The judgments permanently enjoined them from future antifraud violations and ordered them to pay a total of $250,286 in disgorgement, prejudgment interest and civil penalties. [SEC v. John R. Manion, Rocco J. Anselmo, James L. Rammelt, Ivan Kron, Donald S. Italia and William E. Sklar, Civil Action No. CIV 99-1103 PHX, ROS, D. Ariz.] (LR-16640) sec.gov