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 : GALTECH SEMICONDUCTOR MATERIALS CORP. (GTSM) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: gammaray who wrote (307)	5/14/2002 1:04:03 PM
From: Mahatmabenfoo	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 394

--- Pratt initially refused to resign. If true, there's no public information about that whatsoever-- it's completely contradicted by GTSM's SEC statements. So, if it's true, you learned that only be getting non-public information from management. And that's important, as you'll see in a few sentences. --- Current management --- asked if they could use my shares as a part of a --- majority vote to show pratt the door. That and --- subsequent pressure forced his resignation. Your cry --- about insider information and rumor mongering makes no --- sense to me. That's the funniest post I've read in months! Management is talking to you... but the idea of GTSM boosters having inside information "makes not sense to you!". Lovely! I have zero evidence that Pratt resigned for any reason other than the one in the SEC statements -- which I'll quote in a later message. And those reasons are devastating in their implications for this company that's accomplished so little since 1984. It's not even a full-time scam -- it's managers have day-jobs! --- or or stop your idle charges. GTSM is a scam -- a deliberate cynical collection of lies and deception supported specifically by people on RB who get inside info and broadcast it. It embarrasses me that they can fool some people so easily. --- Either report your charges of insider gossip to the to --- the SEC I'm working on it. Your post explaining how you make investment decisions partly based on the non-public info you get from management will help. Thanks. - Charles

To: gammaray who wrote (307)	5/14/2002 1:45:53 PM
From: Mahatmabenfoo	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 394

As promised, the reason Pratt designed. Note that GTSM said it was going to replace Pratt and Porter -- a year ago (and never did). Note that they had tech experience, which leaves GTSM with 76 year old Allred (the most discredited of the bunch -- who claimed the biggest breakthrough in semiconductor history in 1987 and has since done nothing). Note that GTSM had free rent because the space was where one of them had a day-job -- and now GTSM pays $1,000 rent. Why would you join in the campaign to demonize Pratt? What is the evidence he did anything bad? He kept GTSM more honest SEC reports, and presided over the company's boule that was supposed to be tested -- and when no written report resulted Verity pulled back on its plan to fund the company $450k. Coincidence? My take is GTSM threw out the only honest guy because this company can't afford honesty. It has nothing. It's execs have day jobs -- making this only a part time scam, and not even a new one (since it started its heroic campaign of hype and no action in 1984). - Charles ============================================== FORM 10-QSB For the quarter ended September 30, 2001 On June 29, 2001, William F. Pratt resigned from his positions as Chief Executive Officer, President and Director, and David R. Porter resigned from his positions as Secretary/Treasurer. The resignations were due to lack of Company funding, inability to proceed with material operations, and the loss of facility space. These events were reported on June 29, 2001 in a Form 8-K filing. FORM 8-K On June 29, 2001, William F. Pratt resigned as our CEO and President and as a director, and David R. Porter resigned as our Secretary/Treasurer and as a director. These resignations were due to: our lack of funding as discussed above; our inability to proceed with material operations until we receive such funding; and the need of Patterned Fiber Composites, Inc., which had been making a portion of its facilities available to us, for the space that had served as our facilities. As a result, our equipment has been packed and stored pending the receipt of any future funding that may become available. Messrs. Pratt and Porter have provided us with a copy of their resignation letter, which discusses these matters, but have not requested that the matters be disclosed. The remaining directors and executive officers are commencing a search for qualified replacements for Messrs. Pratt and Porter.

To: gammaray who wrote (307)	5/14/2002 2:30:29 PM
From: Mahatmabenfoo	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 394

--I do not agree with Norm's tactics That's no reason to hide his ugliness. Let's take a look at how your source of information talks. Great friends you got. - Charles ======= From Norm's most recent============== ragingbull.lycos.com Tiladen was grateful for the tip since the food stamps put more falafel on the table. But the accountant understood that Tiladen's cash flow had been greatly enhanced. Each month he was paid $60 cash and got food stamps worth $20. In reality he had $80 to spend for the month even though he only had $60 in his pocket. However Tiladen never could get past the fact that he never had more than $60 at any one time during the month. At the end of the month he he quickly forgot that he had $60 at the beginning of the month to spend on necessities to run the family. I guess some ragheads are never happy that money spent in the beginning of the month is no longer in pocket at the end of the month. PS Cash flow was further enhanced due to tax consequences for Tiladen but I don't want to give tilpue too much info at one time. Hopefully he will learn and shut his pie hole. Norm (again)

To: gammaray who wrote (307)	6/30/2002 7:33:57 AM
From: Mahatmabenfoo	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 394

SEC rule It's unfair -- and illegal -- for a company to selectively disclose information to only some sharholders when the information could lead to a buy or sell decision. For example, when a GTSM insider whispers to a shareholder that GTSM has a major new facility (see RB for evidence of this example) before it's been publicly announced, he's breaking the law. But what GTSM is worse -- it has high level insiders whispering info that's not merely undisclosed, it's DIFFERENT than that GTSM's SEC statements say. - Charles ================================================ sec.gov ACTION: Final rule. SUMMARY: The Securities and Exchange Commission is adopting new rules to address three issues: the selective disclosure by issuers of material nonpublic information; when insider trading liability arises in connection with a trader's "use" or "knowing possession" of material nonpublic information; and when the breach of a family or other non-business relationship may give rise to liability under the misappropriation theory of insider trading. The rules are designed to promote the full and fair disclosure of information by issuers, and to clarify and enhance existing prohibitions against insider trading. EFFECTIVE DATE: The new rules and amendments will take effect October 23, 2000.