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.

Technology Stocks : HIGH SPEED ACCESS {HSAC} -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: midnight_cowboy who wrote (921)	10/15/2000 7:58:49 PM
From: Network Pukka	Respond to of 963

Everyone: Well I do not know what the conference call will entail, however, its probably just another inept attempt by Dan to deflect attention from him. As far as HSA being involved with Lucent voice I say HAH,HAH,HAH!!! This was done purely to try and give HSA credibility with the market using another Vendor and involves NO, I repeat NO trials/deployments etc. As far as HSA deploying DSL I say HAH,HAH!!! It exists NOWHERE in any market they serve! It was done purely to stoke the streets appetite for press releases. I am very pessimistic on this company because I have intimate knowledge of everything there and that is why I sold a long time ago. I wish I could say something positive about them because there are some good people there but management and their seventeen vice-presidents sucking the cash and doing NOTHING are going to kill this company and soon! regards, n.p.

To: midnight_cowboy who wrote (921)	10/15/2000 9:14:46 PM
From: silversoldier a/k/a SI Sy	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 963

Cowboy, I appreciate your prompt response. I have no quarrel with the material you furnished, based upon your own research. However, I distrust the writer on the RB board. First, in September, 2000, when he wrote his message, he refers to no facts more recent than 1999, when the Haysac and market situations were utterly different. That omission sends a loud warning klaxon. Second, by innuendo, he implies that PA was in AOL when it started its meteoric rise. This simply is not correct, as many on this board, who have followed PA far longer than I have, will attest. This is not to say PA may not have made some profit, but most PA commentators consider his exit from AOL to have been far too premature and ill advised. The RB writer's version of PA's investment in Go2Net does not accord with what I have learned on the GNET board. I will leave it to others to give the precise facts, which, if my memory is correct, would establish that the RB fellow's version is an invention. In addition the rumored visit of Savoy to AOL, unless that writer speaks of a second event, is so dated and stale as to be thrown out in its entirely. I hope to contribute further after I hear the requested comments from the others. Sy