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.

Strategies & Market Trends : Booms, Busts, and Recoveries -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: TobagoJack who wrote (14157)	1/28/2002 11:31:49 PM
From: petekoby	Respond to of 74559

Jay . I agree with you , he would not put good money to bad . Long term it is viable and needed business. On the other subject. Talked with Exxon petrochemicals sales manager. He told me that last week they had sales meeting, but subject was not how to sale more but creditworthiness of customers, also, gradual improvement in next couple of quaters.

To: TobagoJack who wrote (14157)	1/29/2002 11:10:00 AM
From: Anchan	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 74559

Good early morning (in Oz), Jay: this puzzles me about Global Crossing: "...Under the reorganisation plan, existing common equity and preferred shareholders will not get a stake in the restructured company. Global Crossing said its creditors would get a combination of cash, new debt and new equity. ..." Can it be? Does this mean, anybody who buys (like you are trying to) Global Crossing (GLBXQ on the pink sheets today) would lose their money because "existing ...shareholders will not get a stake in the restructured company"? Am I dense, or just a tired genius?