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.

Non-Tech : SLJB - Sulja Brothers Building Supply, Inc. (Bulls Board) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: rrufff who wrote (1318)	12/5/2006 6:56:16 PM
From: creede	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1521

You and I certainly cannot be at odds. You taught me the precepts I now argue, and we are on the same team. That said, can I tweak this just a bit. When I say "shareholder friendly," you know that I mean the capital structure. So far, we see no evidence that this PLNI or VWKM in that regard. Petar could be the most obnoxious person when you spoke to him, but if he kept the capital structure tight and kept his promises on AF's, then the stock would likely reward you. I agree that the capital structure is a key component of "shareholder friendly", but it cannot be the entire basis of the precept. Case in point, what about CHSD? I have no idea what the capital structure of the stock was, buy judging by the pps, it must be pretty tight. So it seems that prompt, honest communication has to be included in the shareholder friendly equation. If a company tells me something by phone or by PR then I either expect it to happen, or a prompt logical explanation to come shortly thereafter. This is where the LBWR's and NNYG's set themselves apart. Early this year I reported that there would be no more dilution in LBWR, and then it came raining down. Everyone pitched a hissy, of course, and went off on Dexter on the IHUB thread. Dexter called me at work to tell me he did not appreciate what was being said about him. Turns out, I misunderstood what he said. He had said that after the 504 there would be no more significant dilution. I thought the 504 shares were all in, but there were still a few more mil to go. He said that they were through, and now 9 months later, no more shares have been added to the float. Now, that's what I call shareholder friendly. Prompt, honest communication when there is a problem, combined with proper management of the capital structure. So, do you agree with Ima and the bashers that all pinks are scams? You know that's their entire premise they hide behind? GB-ND creede