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 : S3 (A LONGER TERM PERSPECTIVE) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: stock talk who wrote (7550)	11/7/1997 1:08:00 PM
From: Jan A. Van Hummel	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 14577

Frank, I think you are right. That is the reason the stock won't likely go down much further. Those that entered at these lower levels did not do so to liquidate at $4-5/share. The ones dumping are the small disenchanted investors and their cumulative holdings may not be large enough to make a significant dent in the price. IMHO The price can only move down if there is more negative information released. The current price has discounted all the bad news released to-date. Mind you, looking at some of the other hi-techs I am following, there is plethora of companies that have seen similar erosion of their stock price on lesser bad news. Jan A. Van Hummel

To: stock talk who wrote (7550)	11/7/1997 2:27:00 PM
From: mph	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 14577

Hi FrankTalk: I don't know much about these particular kinds of shareholder lawsuits, so take the following observation with a grain of salt--in other settings, where it is learned that a highly placed officer or even an employee actually engaged in fraud or misconduct, the failure to terminate that person can be considered a ratification of his/her misconduct on the part of the employer. Of course, since these guys were officers, it is probably a strict liability situation for SIII anyway. It will be interesting to see how this plays out. mph