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 : 360Networks - TSX - TSIX -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Ian@SI who wrote (276)	6/2/2001 9:22:03 PM
From: James Calladine	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 449

IAN: I agree with you. Bondholders often have quite large positions, and generally have access to information that enables them to evaluate their credit risk better than the typical common shareholder. The comment in the Barrons' article that if the bonds are selling at 8 to 10 cents on the dollar, and the bonds have a seniority greater than common (which they do), then the common should really have no value. If this appraisal is wrong, and someone wants to bet that there is a greater value than that, then presumably that person should buy into the bond proposition, on the grounds that the seniority of claim makes it a better deal. I have a big 1k share position in TSIX, bought at $1.20. I don't view it as an investment, but more a roll of the dice. But probably a better roll of the dice would be to buy a bond, but I don't imagine anybody wants to sell me $1000 of bonds. Incidentally, who does sell them? I think it would be a better roll! Or maybe I should learn to stop throwing away money...! What's your point of view about TSIX, Ian? I see your comments on various threads and definitely value your viewpoint. Namaste! Jim

To: Ian@SI who wrote (276)	6/3/2001 12:22:12 PM
From: Dexter Lives On	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 449

Ian, I lash out at noone. If you want to believe the media reports aren't driven by an agenda, that's your choice to make. If you still believe in truth (as concerns investing), power to you. I guess I've seen too much and become too cynical to take anything at face value. I agree that all arguments should be evaluated in part of some greater, more complete analysis, but to take one report as being "the truth" as many seem to, is what got tech. investors where they are today. I have no great interest in 360 but don't like to see any good business fall subject to the bond vigilantes; but as you say, it's a cycle that makes the strong stronger. I am curious to know why you think ALA not providing the $300M on the old terms means they won't be coming back for much better terms. Writing off a $21 cost basis asset when it's valued at $1 seems like a good tax decision; you seem to suggest it means something more. Regards, Rob