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 : NTN Communications, worth 185 million? -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Rich Genik who wrote (1754)	12/6/1997 8:56:00 PM
From: Paul Mathis	Respond to of 2985

Thank you very much.

To: Rich Genik who wrote (1754)	12/7/1997 12:36:00 PM
From: JAMES F. CLASPILL III	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 2985

Thanks for the research. I just wonder if the newsletter that recommendated the sell of NTN did it own independent research, seems they were quick on the trigger???? BTW, was it Oxford??? Jim P.S If anyone has a copy of the newsletter, how about posting what it said.

To: Rich Genik who wrote (1754)	12/7/1997 6:19:00 PM
From: dwight vickers	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 2985

Rich, Great job sluething. Where did you get the info on S&S? Watch those two situations closely over a longer period of time. I will respectfully disagree with you though, on two points. 1.The conversion of IGCA was probably used to sell the stock down to a level where short covering is more profitable. My guess is that they have unfinished business. 2.Bio-Plexis situation is anybody's guess. They may be so close to an FDA decision that they would risk a REG.S. I would ask why no conventional financing would be available under those circumstances, however. Respectable companies don't have to give away their shares at fire sale prices that slap existing shareholders in the face. Believe me, an "investment" by these guys is not an investment in the traditional sense. That is, it's not in a stock they hope will go up and allow them to profit. It is the "investment" that they make money on, independent of the company's fortune. At least the after "investment" manipulations. It's possible that the biotech company is a "real" investment by one, since both aren't involved. I don't pretend to be burdened by excess knowledge on either of these companies or their situations. But I do know discounted financings, and I have yet to find any credible analysis or expert opinion that will say they are a good deal for shareholders. Keep in mind that NTN has said they were facing bankruptcy without the financing. They have many "divisions" of the company that were considered growth possibilities that now look like money pits. The core business is contracting and must be losing money, or at best not making up for continuing losses corporate wide. If they can't stem the tide operationally, or better yet show some growth, what is the bottom line? You might want to look over the filing done regarding the financing. Look at the cash situation before and after. Figure in the building gain and GTK payment. Does it look like they are cash flow positive as they have been saying? Then look at the trading pattern. It's gruesome at best, horrifying at worst. I fear that without some huge news coming from IWN (doubtful at best), that sub $1 is on the horizon. Pray for Jan.1 when tax loss selling can no longer be an issue. And oh yah, stop pimping me on the INNN thread. :^) Dwight

To: Rich Genik who wrote (1754)	2/21/1998 6:36:00 AM
From: Rich Genik	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 2985

Update on Stark and Shepard: (See message link for background info on earlier post) IGCA: No filings since last post. Current price 3.1875, down from 5.125 when the financing was announced, but off lows of around 2.5 early this year. BPLX: Nothing new to report here either. Stock down a little at ~4. They recently changed accountants and I sort of found this sentence funny in their 8k: "The reports of the former independent accountants on the financial statements of the registrant for fiscal years ended December 31, 1995 and 1996 contained no adverse opinion or disclaimer of opinion, nor were qualified or modified as to uncertainty, audit scope, or accounting principles, except that on the December 31, 1996 financial statements, the opinion dated April 11, 1997, contained an explanatory paragraph relating to the registrant's ability to continue as a going concern." Still keeping an eye out and can't seem to find other companies with relations to these two firms. Rich