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 : VLVT (was CSMA) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: TraderGreg who wrote (1987)	11/29/1997 9:24:00 AM
From: David M.	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 11708

Greg,W/EPS of .259 w/your figures that includes all shares .But the restrcted portion of those shares should not be brought into the picture yet should they?whats your thought there. David M.

To: TraderGreg who wrote (1987)	11/29/1997 9:33:00 AM
From: TraderGreg	Respond to of 11708

The Fiscal Year that ended on May 31 appears to be Fiscal Year 96 and we are presently in Fiscal Year 97. I say this because while reading the letter from H.K. Elrod that accompanied the proxy information, he referred to "Fiscal Year 96 and the first four months of FY 1997..." I haven't had a chance to verify this but I think its accurate. Since seven months of the prior Fiscal Year covered 1996, I believe they chose the convention to name it FY1996 and the June1 to Sept30,1997 period is the first four months of FY1997. Just so no one gets confused. TraderGreg

To: TraderGreg who wrote (1987)	11/29/1997 10:08:00 AM
From: David Smith	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 11708

Greg; Regarding your statement of compliance and continued dumping of wastes: I conservatively assumed that a law would be passed and 96 % OF THE STATE WOULD SIMPLY IGNORE THE LAW. The law is in place and is quite stringent: $10,000 per day fine for unknowingly dumping ... $25,000 per day fine for knowingly dumping ... $50,000 per day fine for dumping a second time ... The reason that the law was not enforced is that no constructive alternatives can be given to offenders. THAT will change. Two things are going to occur even before final ratification by the Governer. First, a marketing effort will occur to educate those potential clients about the well. Remember, not everyone wants to pollute. Some will gladly use the facility without threat of non-compliance. Second, the state will get involved in compliance. Who could afford the fines that the law stipulates? The law will be enforced and the offenders will know it. I say that you can go with the company's estimates on this point. I would be surprised if there isn't full utilization of the well (7500 barrels a day) in mid-year 1998. David Smith