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 : FRANKLIN TELECOM (FTEL) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: topwright who wrote (23115)	12/13/1997 9:39:00 AM
From: detroit denny	Respond to of 41046

To those going to the annual meeting i would suggest printing out bg's post # 23107 and asking those questions. Perhaps joe p, on his 12-17 visit, could help by asking those questions for us?

To: topwright who wrote (23115)	12/14/1997 5:27:00 AM
From: Noneyet	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 41046

RB, Evidently you haven't read much of the content, in the posts that I responded to, or other's comments regarding that same individual and his predictions. That said, on to more important matters, such as " which cat ate that Thanksgiving bird you refer to". Nov. 12 & 13 / See Delaying Amendment to Form S-1 freeedgar.com Nov. 17 / Yahoo / Franklin's S-1 Goes Effective biz.yahoo.com Dec. 9 / See Reg filing ( with mention of the ATT lawsuit ) freeedgar.com LEGAL PROCEEDINGS On July 28, 1997 the Company was named as a defendant in an action brought by AT&T Corp. ("AT&T") against Connect America, a reseller of "800" number service, its officers and affiliates, and several Internet Service Providers, including the Company. The action was brought in the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California. In general, the complaint alleges that Connect America and its officers fraudulently acquired 800 numbers from AT&T, failed to pay for them, and resold them to the Company and the other Internet Service Providers on a "flat rate" basis, notwithstanding the fact that AT&T's charges for 800 service are typically based on time utilized. The claims against the Company and the other Internet Service Providers are based on unjust enrichment, on the theory that the Company and the other Internet Service Providers knew or should have known that flat rate 800 service was unavailable. In addition to injunctive relief against Connect America and its officers, the complaint seeks damages of $7.4 million, punitive damages and attorneys' fees. The Company has filed an answer to the complaint denying the material allegations thereof, and plans to vigorously contest the action. There can be no assurance that the Company will be successful in its defense of the action. Because of the large amount sought in the complaint, an adverse outcome would have a material adverse effect on the Company's financial condition. July 31 / Ftel's comments on the ATT lawsuit. ftel.com As always confusion reigns supreme. The bird gets tastier. Gobble, Gobble T.D. PS. I believe the confusion over Intrine.com and " Dannon Topping " stemmed from Ftel's comments here. biz.yahoo.com REPEAT biz.yahoo.com >>>According to Frank Peters, chief executive officer and president of Franklin, ''We completed the internal proof-of-concept for our new technology and we looked for customers to install a few units to complete our beta tests. We didn't expect such an enthusiastic reception, although our analysis of the cost of telephoning over IP networks told us the concept is a winner. Our customer is a major company which is preparing a press release of their own at a later date.'' <<<< Pay particular attention to Ftel's comments of "Major company."