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 : Globalstar Telecommunications Limited GSAT -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: TMann who wrote (17703)	10/6/2000 9:05:17 PM
From: Maurice Winn	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 29987

TMann, I agree the 3Q MOU must be rotten. So much for the theory that BS was doing a cunning 'hunt the shorts' financing. That is obviously NOT the case. It does seem more like 'milk the market before they see the dismal 3Q MOU'. Globalstar needs to nearly double to get back to the little peak before the latest slide. It interests me that the stock price was rising steeply just before the announcement of financing - it's almost as though somebody knew something and they were getting in first - then sold on the news, along with the ongoing tranches of 'sell stock as fast as we can'. I wonder if the SEC can check up on who was buying stock on the runup and who sold just after the financing announcement. Okay you shorts, you get to have another laugh at the stupid longs' expense. There are still a few weeks until the Thanksgiving short squeeze, so make hay while the sun shines. I suppose there are quite a few insiders and related parties who know how many handsets have sold and how many MOUs have been used and how many fixed units have sold. It must be tempting for them to sell some shares to avoid being caught in the downdraft [or buy if the news is good]. It's a shame that Globalstar sees fit to hold such potentially illegally-traded information within fortress San Jose rather than let shareholders be informed as much as insiders. I thought there was a new law introduced [a few months ago or maybe even last year - I can't recall when it was] which said such market-sensitive information had to be released to shareholders as soon as possible. I hope the legal advisers of Globalstar are giving them good advice and not leaving the company vulnerable to lawsuits over illegally withheld information. It's absurd to have had no information on sales since June's results when the impact on the share price is so important. No doubt somebody will argue that the MOU information is so useless on its own that it would be unprofessional to emphasize it by separating it from the rest of the financial picture which is given in entirety during quarterly results. If that's true, you'd have to wonder why BS goes on about MOU being so important. Sure, other factors enter the equation, but a beam of light is better than total darkness. But last I heard, it's the investor's job to decide what information is relevant and what weight to put on it, not the company's. They might as well not announce IFN plans, SCADA plans, sales to Mexico petrol stations, a Red Cross sale, or anything else, because each bit of information on its own is useless to understanding the total picture. So they might as well just envelop San Jose in a cone of silence, pull up the drawbridge and complete the KGB approach to business. I was tempted to sell at the last little peak, but it might have been to an insider who knows that MOU are actually quite reasonable and sales are starting to get traction and that a short squeeze is likely. Now the KGB Cone Of Silence has devalued my shares by about half. The GlobalstarUSA wonderful new marketing plan for 16 October will no doubt give early insight into how sales are going. My bet is badly and they'll trim prices just a tad to avoid the impression that there's anything wrong [thereby avoiding anything going right]. If the, snicker, "Great new plans" offered by Vodafone Australia are any guide, do NOT plan on accelerated MOU sales any time soon. Mqurice

To: TMann who wrote (17703)	10/7/2000 8:11:31 AM
From: BobRealEstate	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 29987

TMann, here you go, here's what Mr. Powers thinks. <To: BobRealEstate who wrote (17344) From: Gregg Powers Monday, Sep 25, 2000 2:06 PM ET Reply # of 17720 Boy...talk about turning a silver lining into a sow's ear. Last I checked, $56mm-$68mm still constituted real money. Last I checked, public companies like Alcatel, Vodafone, Qualcomm and Loral were still governed by Boards of Directors that would most likely take a dim view of a 'cosmetic' investment. Do the pundits on this thread really believe that Vodafone management said, “let's throw Bernard a bone...give him a few million dollars...so he'll stop calling?” If so, I suspect that there are several psychotropic drugs available to treat your condition... ...Vodaphone, Elsacom, TE.SA.M and China Telecom are key partners NOT for their equity contribution, but because these companies represent a significant component of marketing complement that is selling the service worldwide. Were there no demand, were the business plan as flawed as the pundits suggest, I can envision no reason why these service providers did not cut and run right now. This is not nuclear physics.... While the financial commitment is material, I believe that Globalstar management perceives the requirement to be largely prophylactic at this juncture. I recognize this to be a balancing act; too much capital equates to unnecessary dilution while too little will be perceived as a statement of limited confidence. I think the correct conclusion is pretty simple. The partner's came through with a meaningful incremental financing...before it was necessary and in advance of the business demonstrating trends that would necessarily support the investment. This is good. For investors looking to this financing as a stake to drive through the heart of the shorts, the deal most likely is not going to be enough. For investors looking to management to undertake a prudent financing, mitigating financial risk while sustaining an acceptable level of dilution, the deal is a statement of profound confidence. I cannot understand why people view the financing in such a binary fashion; one should logically presume either management believes the current transaction sufficient to allow for proof of concept or that the partners will sign up for another round as necessary. For what it is worth, we believe Bernard delivered a businessman’s financing rather than a heroic gesture. We are delighted.> Pretty clear.