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: s martin who wrote (25232)	12/9/1997 12:48:00 PM
From: tonto	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 55532

By Deborah Lohse Staff Reporter of The Wall Street Journal Trying to distance itself from some of Wall Street's smallest and most speculative companies, the Nasdaq Stock Market's parent board is expected to vote on whether to make about 3,400 stocks no longer eligible to trade on the market's lowest rung. The rung, known as the OTC Bulletin Board, is essentially an electronic-trading forum run by Nasdaq where brokers and dealers can get up-to-date quotes, trading data, and a list of market makers in roughly 6,800 Bulletin Board securities. But stocks on the board aren't listed on the Nasdaq market itself, which can be a touchy issue, since Nasdaq's name is often linked to them. That is true even though the companies that list on the board either can't meet listing standards at markets like Nasdaq, or they don't want to file financial statements with the Securities and Exchange Commission. These unlisted issues include foreign securities known as American depositary receipts, and small regional companies, such as banks that don't seek much stock trading. The latest proposal is part of a long struggle for Nasdaq to shake off an image of being a forum rife with small-stock scams. In recent years especially, Nasdaq has gained credibility by beefing up trading rules and standards for companies that trade in its top-tier National Market, home to such giants as Microsoft and Intel, or its second-tier SmallCap Market. But since April, Frank Zarb, chairman of the National Association of Securities Dealers, Nasdaq's parent, has been trying to find a way to clean up the loosely regulated OTC Bulletin Board, which is run by Nasdaq but which has almost no standards for the companies that list there. Now, board members of Nasdaq's parent organization are expected to tentatively approve a proposal to kick companies off the OTC Bulletin Board if they don't file financial statements to SEC, banking or insurance regulators, according to people familiar with the proposal. NASD officials said that it is their policy not to discuss proposals before the board meets. Board members are also expected to discuss prohibiting brokerage firms from quoting prices for OTC Bulletin Board stocks if the brokers don't have current, reliable financial information on a company. Also, every broker that recommends a bulletin board stock to a client would have to review detailed financial statements of the company before doing so. Finally, the proposal would also require every investor to get a disclosure statement that would spell out the difference between the bulletin board and other markets, in terms of liquidity (or ease of trading), standards, and market-maker obligations, according to people familiar with the proposal. If the NASD board approves the proposal Thursday, it will be put out for comment by members. But these actions won't rid the marketplace of companies that fail to file publicly available financial statements, people familiar with the proposal say. Any of the companies that fails to meet the raised standards of the bulletin board would be able to trade on the Pink Sheets, a less automated system that is owned by the National Quotation Bureau, which isn't affiliated with Nasdaq. Standards for the Pink Sheets aren't expected to be affected by this proposal. Thus, investors in these speculative stocks likely would find it more difficult to buy and sell them. OTC Bulletin Board stocks are a little more convenient to trade, because Nasdaq provides space on its trading workstations for bulletin-board stock quoting. Investors in the Pink Sheets must get most of their information, and trade, over the phone. Currently, stocks can trade on either the OTC Bulletin Board or the Pink Sheets as long as one market maker "vouches" that the company has current financial statements. Market makers do this by filing a 15c2-11 form. Because all market makers are NASD members, the NASD has responsibility for ensuring that market makers are abiding by that rule. Securities regulators have expressed alarm that unscrupulous promoters, brokers and traders have taken advantage of the loosely regulated marketplace to foist worthless stocks on unwitting investors. Securities regulators have brought a steady stream of stock-manipulation and conspiracy cases to stem such abuses, which are considered easier to pull off on the bulletin board because of its thin trading volume and relative obscurity. (c) 1997 Dow Jones & Company, Inc.

To: s martin who wrote (25232)	12/9/1997 1:49:00 PM
From: Pugs	Respond to of 55532

Sell any?....I pick-up more on the dips!! I have never sold one share of RMIL or OVIS!! And...if I were Mork, w/ an alleged short position that would cost me millions & millions to cover....Would I be looking for RMIL longs to shake shares from? Would I continue to short out of Canada? Would I pull out all the stops to avoid covering? Would I pay nays to slam RMIL and post propganda night & Day?.....I ain't Mork, but you can see the depth of his 'alleged' situation! I don't see anyone from the Cavalry or Cartel selling, those selling are selling air anyways, We have over the estimated float, we're waiting for certs, ........I can't see how your curiosity keeps you here all day & nite, thats all, Pugs

To: s martin who wrote (25232)	12/9/1997 1:52:00 PM
From: TLWatson59	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 55532

S.M. You have to classify me as a former shareholder. My interest or at this point curiosity in remaining attentive to this thread is I guess threefold. First I did have a vested interest, second I was fascinated up to a point with the concept of the "short squeeze" and wanted to see if such a move was feasable and third I became kind of mezmorized with the entertainment being provided by many of the conributors to the thread. MOPO at this point in time is that the short position whatever it may be is not having any effect on price movement to any significant degree. Some short term shorters at the $3 - $4 level may have accounted for some of the recent upside moves. But those who want to read what two different souces have written in an objective manner will see a number of people who have purchased stock, say within the past few weeks, asked for and received their certificates after a normal waiting period. If there were shares available to be issued by the TA for these purchases, where is the shortage that others insist must be at hand. The claim by the Cavelry that they have not received hundreds of thousands of shares since requesting them in August does'nt seem to jive with what others are experiencing. Perhaps there is something else involved with those transactions that has held up the transfer but I personally don't think it is a physical lack of certificates at the TA. As a general thought has anyone called the TA and posed a hypothetical question such as, If I as a broker were to submit a request to transfer 300,000 shares into individual names would the TA be legally able to honor the request? In any event the tug of war continues and if nothing else is both interesting and informative for me to stay tuned in here. Unfortunately I have not learned how to master the transfer of data from one directory to another such as Tonto did with the WSJ article otherwise I would have done this morning when I brought it up along with today's Technical Analysis report. Good luck to all, TLW