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.

Biotech / Medical : Chromatics Color Sciences International. Inc; CCSI -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Spunky Beaver who wrote (496)	11/22/1997 8:40:00 PM
From: JanyBlueEyes	Respond to of 5736

I am long in this stock, but I am always on the look out for negative news and data. I have made the serious mistake in the past of dismissing negative news and facts as the actions of shortsellers. I have learned my lessons the hard way and I question everything and I remain skeptical of anyone who displays tendencies of dwelling on the positives and minimizing the negatives of the stocks they post about. This is exacly why I maintain and post the Research Page. It's the facts that matter...the facts help people to make informed decisions. Larry, I am happy that you have researched this company and made the decision to invest. All contributions to the information on CCSI are welcome, however, maybe you could go about it in a more diplomatic way next time.....the wording in your posts was interpreted by some (including me) that made it look like you had an agenda to flame the company in order to short the stock. I look forward to any and all contributions made on these boards - be it negative or positive information - as long as it is backed up with facts and not hype or rumours. We are all in this for the same reasons. Jane

To: Spunky Beaver who wrote (496)	11/22/1997 9:57:00 PM
From: Mark Collier	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 5736

Larry, I agree with your interest in the facts. I for one also only want to know the truth! Your option conversion senario may very well explain the share sales. I understand school, food, and basic needs requirements but its hard for me to accept the fact that someone NEEDS 1 Million Plus for incidental personal items. This URL will lead you to one of those dreaded government forms that give me the devil when trying to gather info. It states that Darby was awarded 300,000 options and David 200,000 options for calendar year 1996. edgar.whowhere.com If I understand correctly, generally, these 1996 options would not be exercisable in 1997 and only a portion of them would be exercisable in 1998. (around 20%). This dreaded form also does not indicate any options awarded during 1994 & 1995. You, are someone else, may have a more clear picture of the Macfarlane's optionable rights. Also at the risk of being considered a public retard, Why is Darby considered the legal owner in public filings of the shares supposedly owned by her ex-husband? Aren't divorced people suppose to bite, kick, pull hair, place remote bombs under cars, and drive by and shoot up the remaining spouses house?