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: Parker Benchley who wrote (7720)	11/11/1997 7:12:00 AM
From: Sam Gompers	Read Replies (4) \| Respond to of 14577

George and all, I too have been lurking on this thread since May and can no longer stand on the sidelines without putting in my two cents. To all new investors and to those who are not well informed about threads such as this, I offer one word of advice: BEWARE. Everyone has an agenda, some are liars, some are cheats, some are paid (according to Frank, aka Stocktalk, $1,500 a week) to post what is in the best interest of those who have paid them to say. Most of everything you hear on threads such as this is manipulated and self serving for those who post. I have learned a lot by visiting this thread, but most of what I have learned is that most of the informatin is useless. Some cases in point: 1. Leo - the former cheerleader of SIII- used to tell all of us how hard he worked to "dig" up information on SIII and posted time and again how SIII would be at $25 by Jan. 98 and $40 by June '98. He never "dug up" anything like insider trading and lawsuits, only of "news just around the corner" that would drive the stock ever higher. Small investors like myself believed his nonsense and bought in. He was not only wrong on all accounts, but still has the arrogance to post here and tell everyone to SUE THE BASTA***!! What a joke! 2. Even more absurd is Frank/Stocktalk, who started this thread, and who claims to be a "bigtime trader" and a possible BOARD OF DIRECTORS candidate for SIII, but he can't even get a call returned from management and actually "turned over the leadership of the thread" to LEO of all people a while back, when he was frustrated that the CEO didn't return his calls. WHAT A JOKE!!!! 3. George, I must admit, you make me laugh, and, as a former catholic school grad, I loved the story of the flatulent nun, vaseline and what not. If anything, you have provided some lighter moments on a thread that is truly absurd. thanks for keeping your perspective when everyone else has lost theirs. 4. Ron - I bailed at 7.5 and hope you have the sense to get out as well. I learned a lot about SI and a lot of useful terms and investment options, but most of all, I learned that I should pay NO ATTENTION TO ANYONE WITH AN AGENDA - and that includes 99% of the people who post here 5. Leo - If you do have a conscience, you do owe all the people who, through your endless cheerleading, misleading and distorted perspective of an obviously troubled company, encouraged to invest in this FIASCO, a sincere apology - for you knew better and they did not. You misled and they followed. You had no basis for your hype, and we all paid for it. STOP YOUR BOASTING AND SAY "I"M SORRY, I WAS WRONG." But I'm sure that you will twist this into something else as well, and for all those who may think they are listening to an authoritative voice, it is the voice of a con artist with no soul and no conscience. 6. I paid $75 to get in my two cents. At least I'm consistent! Yet somehow it was well worth it, because at least it is off my chest. And I can at least giggle when I hear people actually think that Frank will be on the board of SIII - perhaps that's where he truly belongs, a loser overlooking a bunch of losers - but then again, he started this thread, didn't he! Sambo

To: Parker Benchley who wrote (7720)	11/11/1997 9:16:00 AM
From: Leo Francis	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 14577

George, I think the lawsuits will uncover more troubles, as there is a lot more beneath this tip of the iceberg imo. BUT, this will actually help S3 along in the longer term, as the results will include the replacement of several executives and board members.(IMO) Shareholders still have the power of votes, and management does not control 50.1% of the shares. Good Trading, and I am frustrated too. This is the first time I have been "fooled" to this extent in my 26 years of investing. I think S3 has too many young executives, who under pressure, simply made(make) too many grey, and/or black decisions. My opinion again. Take care, LF

To: Parker Benchley who wrote (7720)	11/11/1997 10:17:00 AM
From: Richard McMorrow	Respond to of 14577

Hi George, I haven't posted in quite a long time, and have seen the justified frustration spread throughout the old time owners as well as the ones who purchased it more recently. It is clear that old Gary Johnson is taking the heat, and his silence has apparently driven away long time supporters like Frank and others, and perhaps much of the criticism is justified; but I have been a shareholder for a bit longer than many of the posters on this thread and would like to ask if anyone remembers July of 1994, when Terry Holtd and George Hervey were in charge; if memory serves me correctly, S3 had some very alarming announcements then too; the stock plunged as low as 6 1/2 (split adjusted basis) in July of '94 and then recovered later to around 44 six or seven months later. Perhaps the two sitiuations are not the same, (since the suits claim that S3 delibetely defrauded its shareholders, but I remember similar rumblings back in July of 94 after earnings came out}, but in my opinion, the company is still strong and has a good future; those who are upset at the happenings over the past year or so have every right to be, but I just wanted you to know that I'm still hanging in there with S3. I expect to buy more (I am not a big investor in it at present and do not expect it to be the keystone of my portfolio by any means, but I do see this as a buying opportunity similar to the one that occurred in 1994 when I added to my position. I'm not trying to sway anyone one way or the other here, and I know that many will see this as just an example of cheerleading, but I wanted you to know that I agree with one of the earlier posters (either today or last night) who pointed out that the company's balance sheet is strong and its overall health certainly makes me believe that S3 will be around for a long time. I am not a lawyer, and I don't want to characterize the suits as frivolous, but I expect that S3 will be around long after the suits are resolved. Always good to read your epistles. Onward and Upward.