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: shades who wrote (26472)	12/12/1997 12:05:00 PM
From: TLWatson59	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 55532

Shades: I will try to be a bit more succinct in my response. 1. IOM had a publicly verifyable # of shares outstanding for trading RMIL does not. (telephone calls to Morgan or reports by Riley do not IMO qualify as "publicly verifyable" 2. IOM had an internationally recognized marketed product. RMIL has only their internally produced PR News releases and again telephone conversations which are accepted by some as "fact" 3. IOM had for 10 years or more the same management in place and a history of pulicly released "audited" 10K's and quarterly published 10Q's. RMIL has had what to me look's like a revolving door where management changed like the wind direction in my old home town Albequerque - very frequently. 4. IOM had not only a vocal chorus of supporters on the Internet but momentum fund managers who put large bets on their prospects. Again publicly verifyable. RMIL has what appears to be a small devoted group of supporters who have chosen to essentially follow the direction of one man, and those who on their own have nade calls to RMIL accept face value what they are told without any concrete evidence to back it up. PR News releases are not hard cold facts. That's why they have those disclaimers at the bottom of them. 5. IOM had short sellers who again on public record took positions banking on IOM's inability to perform and succeeed. The shorts did not come on board at $2. They attacked what they thought was a highly over priced stock based on the fundementals they had on hand. Eventually after what amounted to almost wholesale slaughter those who were last on board to short made a killing when the stock collapsed from $55 to the $teens. RMIL is accused of having "naked" short sellers and illegal shorts sellers. None of which is backed up by documentation or public record. Again this claim is based on the word of one man and two officers of the company 5. IOM had a chart pattern that showed at least a ten year base formation under an adjusted price of $5 a share. When the stock broke out of that accumulation area, the trading volume swelled and the upside momentum was fueled by two hot engines. Fervant bulls with a public forum sang their hallelulah and skeptical hedge fund managers and professional doubting Thomases took heavy short positions in a stock whose supply was really limited. RMIL's chart shows a few months of "penny" level trading before its run to $4, where, if this were truly a heavily traded short issue relative to market share supply, even without verifyable fundementals the momentum would have carried it much further on the upside. IMO the attempt to compare real short squeezes with RMIL is futile. As I said yesterday in my TA, there is good potential for the stock to rally above 1.50 if there was enought selling on the drive down to the $1. level. I seriously question whether or not there is sufficient gas left in their engine to return to too much higher levels and remain there. At these prices percentage moves are simple enough to generate with small capital inflow but I have seen nothing to convince me of the existence of a short position anywhere near that proffered by its principle proponent, nor does the market behavior of the stock coraborate it, even with today's rally. As I have often said, for the sake of all who have risked money and are long this stock I wish to be proven wrong for if I am right it may not be a mery christmas for many. You now have my response to the question you are entitled to get a response to but as far as sharing my recommendations or advice, that is still limited to those who I have been associated with for many years and with whom I have shared many thoughts, not only as friends, but as paying clients. The assets spoken of here total well in excess of seven figures. You may however see some comments I make on other threads and if you see something that I stated publicly you are more than welcome to inquire further about that situation. Best wishes. TLW