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 : Cityscape Financial (CTYS) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Robert T. Quasius who wrote (1511)	11/2/1997 11:56:00 AM
From: Sedohr Nod	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 2544

Everybody on this thread had the opportunity to sell at 5 3/4. A fair number had the opportunity to sell at 10. I've been told (by looking at the chart) that it was even possible to sell at 30+. Being a fairly active trader, I have had the opportunity to try to figure out who was responsible for the purchase of my latest "dog" more than once. If I'm lucky, it only happens every 6-8 weeks. Normally, the responsible party turns out to be me-usually a little laziness gets factored in. Just another two cents worth, which is probably a good estimate on what will be recovered in a class action suit. Along with the additional benefit of making it harder for ctys to meet it's cash flow needs. Much luck to you in future, may you only buy those that go up.

To: Robert T. Quasius who wrote (1511)	11/3/1997 6:10:00 PM
From: Ploni	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 2544

I received my legal stuff today from Stull, Stull & Brody. The main contention of their lawsuit is that Cityscape violated accounting rules, and made public statements that business was great because of their English unit, without sufficiently warning of the downside. Stull says this artificially inflated the price of the stock, giving insiders time to sell some positions. Especially impressive was the timing of Steene and Epstein's sales of 1/4 million shares each on 8/13, the day before the company announced that it was revewing all loans in the U.K. Stull doesn't specifically discuss the stock's rapid decline from 10 to 5.5, but they contend that the explosion in volume on 10/21 and 10/22, and the plunge to 3.1875 and 2.375 on those two days, was due to rumors that Cityscape's U.K. chief had declined. While Sankar has said that he knew about this from talks with the company, and the company has said that this was made public in the U.K. weeks earlier, Stull contends that Cityscape had been obligated to publicly release the information in the U.S., weeks earlier. Of course, Stull only discusses things that they can blame on the company, so there is no discussion of short selling, floorless conversions, or the effect of their own lawsuit on the price of the stock. I agree that lawyers are for the most part despicable, subhuman creatures, but as the lawsuit is a reality, I think it is prudent for me to join it. At this stage they are looking for representative parties on behalf of the class. The representative parties get no additional compensation, but may be required to give depositions or testify at trial. If testimony at trial is required, do they reimburse for travel and lodging? That's the only negative that I can see about being a representative party.