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.

Microcap & Penny Stocks : Rocky Mountain Int'l (OTC:RMIL former OTC:OVIS) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: FTJoe who wrote (20859)	11/22/1997 5:28:00 AM
From: Ditchdigger	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 55532

Rule 10b-5, promulgated by the SEC under its á10(b) authority, makes it unlawful for a person ''[t]o employ any device, scheme, or artifice to defraud,'' or ''[t]o engage in any act, practice, or course of business which operates or would operate as a fraud or deceit upon any person, in connection with the purchase or sale of any security.''7

To: FTJoe who wrote (20859)	11/22/1997 5:36:00 AM
From: Ditchdigger	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 55532

Is Selective Disclosure Now Lawful? Shall we discuss this and how it applies to the information we have been recieving via third parties on this thread and by phone conversations with the company and these third parties? I've got time, snowing like a big dog here. DD

To: FTJoe who wrote (20859)	11/22/1997 5:52:00 AM
From: Ditchdigger	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 55532

Shall we start with the post(I hope smartin can find it) which quotes a company official(from company X) stating that he would nolonger answer questions received by a certain someone. Frick'n interesting concept, aye? DD

To: FTJoe who wrote (20859)	11/22/1997 5:58:00 AM
From: Ditchdigger	Read Replies (6) \| Respond to of 55532

Lets move on to the concept of individuals speaking with (company X) officials and receiving information regarding a possible $10m infussion 2 weeks prior to any press release.Take into context an "8-K" discussing a merger involving a $5m infussion 2 months +/- previous-VERY GOOD INFO TO TRADE ON PRIOR TO THE PUBLIC PRESS RELEASE.

To: FTJoe who wrote (20859)	11/22/1997 11:23:00 AM
From: Riley G	Respond to of 55532

This is what Kugler was hinting about the other day when he called me twice during market hours and offered to save me and get me out of this in one piece. There was also a suttle hint about not being hurt if I gave into the nays, I laughed at him when he said this. He keep wanting to know who was feeding me inside information about RMIL! Seems that he and others fail to believe that I and others have no inside information and never have. I truely believe that IF his personal and companies records are seized as evidence, then we MAY see that he and his company are also short in RMIL. The Shorts are trying to attack me hard and heavy in this matter, but I must be stupid because I could care less what they are saying or implying!!! My Bounty Will Come From The Pending Short Squeeze!!! Everyone MUST verify and send those certified/return-receipt letters to your brokers and NASD demanding your RMIL certificates!!! RG --- Message from FTJoe on Nov 22 1997 4:22AM EST So you guys are back on trying to bring Riley down now? A bounty? Go ahead and submit an application. The penalty can be three times the profit gained by the person who traded in the insider info and your bounty would be some part of that. Could be quite a sum, heh? ;-)