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 : Information Architects (IARC): E-Commerce & EIP -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: tech who wrote (3869)	12/29/1997 5:24:00 PM
From: Jeffrey S. Mitchell	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 10786

From a post I wrote to Tech: Tech, two simple questions about CSGI's Reg D shares: 1. Were they or were they not dilutive? I take it from all your Reg S vs Reg D posts here and on the ALYD thread that they were most definitely not dilutive. 2. Is your source for the answer to question 1 CSGI itself or someone outside the company? 207.183.153.206 ========== Tech's reply: I assume the shares were dilutive. 207.183.153.206 ========== Tech, the next time you spend a month and a half telling us the same "investment advice" over and over and over again -- because I presume there will be a next time with you -- would you please at least run it by a broker or investment specialist? Thanks. - Jeff

To: tech who wrote (3869)	12/29/1997 5:53:00 PM
From: feltburner	Respond to of 10786

Tech: don't project your own tendencies onto me- I don't try to twist info., I take it for what it is. The Reg. S offerings pissed me off, but the co. raised the cash to grow its business and stabilize its balance sheet; both of these things help when trying to land multi-million $ contracts with leading firms. Yes, I think they could have raised the cash in a manner that would not have been so detrimental to the share price. But the difference between not knowing Reg S holders are selling and seeing a 144 intent to sell filing hit AFTER the stock has been sold is not really consequential. Chase's shs. are currently weighing on the stock, but the purchase was certainly in the best interest of all but short-term investors in the company. And if you don't think that a div. which will do in excess of $6mm in rev. in '98 is worth $6mm, why are you paying $55-$60mm for CSGI? -Felt Burner