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.

Pastimes : Investment Chat Board Lawsuits -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: FranW who wrote (3565)	8/20/2002 5:04:51 PM
From: E. Charters	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 12465

"or more chances to participate in it." (corruption) Sure why not? Politics, working for a living, business, and marriage are all dirty, debilitating, demeaning, but necessary institutions that depend on one compromising one's principles in order to succeed at them. If you can't beat the crooks at their game, at least we can demand a share of the proceeds. EC<:-}

To: FranW who wrote (3565)	8/20/2002 5:44:04 PM
From: mmmary	Respond to of 12465

Toxic funding: who's to blame I think the CEO's who agree to the toxic funding without telling their shareholders that the share price will definitely decline, should be the ones going to jail along with their stock promoters who promote it as good for the company. Convertible debentures in and of themselves are not illegal. It's a legitimate source of funding. The funder is just doing what was agreed to in the contract, what he did with all the other past companies. As the company is turning to toxic funding, there are no other funds available. The funder needs some incentive and shorting is it. Maybe the ceo thinks he just needs a little money to turn his company around. The ceo has plenty of time to check out the history of the funder. He goes into the deal with his eyes wide open. If he didn't know, then he's inept and should be sued and fired. I also think that the shareholder has to do a little DD also in regard to toxic funding. The shareholder should sell the first second he hears mention of the word. If he still believes in the company, he can buy back in after the dilution and share price decline. I personally believe that any company that uses toxic funding is a total loser. I posted on astn and a few others BEFORE the shareholders agreed to the issuance of new shares for toxic funding. I posted TK's history in detail all over astn. They still voted for it. Those shareholders who saw the posts and still held can only blame themselves. The ceo stated in sec docs that the shares could be shorted even though the ceo said in his silly audio programs that the funder has never shorted shares before. The "funder" was a cayman strawman made just for that one deal so of course he didn't. That ceo was mislead investors a little. It's kinda like this. TK is a gun dealer. He tells you that guns can and will kill people but he'll sell you one if you want. The ceo knows this and buys a gun. He loads it up with bullets and shoots the shareholders in the head. Sometimes he tells the shareholders he may shoot them, other times he does not. The shareholders should run the second they see the gun. Don't wait to be shot in the head. What really gets me is the CEOs who are playing the victim, like npct, mbpt, internet law library... They knew full well what the funding would do. If they didn't, they should sue themselves. What also gets me is that they are suing the funder but IFFFFF anyone would win, who gets the money? The company, not the shareholders who lost it. Pretty amazing, pretty scammy companies. I realize that investors are angry about losing a lot of money but they need to take out their anger on the appropriate target. The companies themselves. More info on tk mary.cc I still post this site on companies where they are considering toxic funding...and they still take the toxic funding...and the share price dumps then everyone goes "what happened?" They will continue to take the funds as long as they are offered.