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: DJ Byrne who wrote (31902)	12/31/1997 11:45:00 AM
From: Riley G	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 55532

>Date: Wed, 31 Dec 1997 08:16:37 -0800 (PST) >Subject: comments on RMIL > > >RMIL (Rocky Mountain International) has one issue. Those >who are short must buy back shares when the total float >has been requested AND delivered to investors. > >Therefore it is entirely counter-productive to condition >an investment in RMIL on the basis of the status of garment >factories, ships, or water plant funding. Even in the event >there is no $5 or $10 million cash infusion, this does not >change the fact that a short can be made to buy back. > >Consequently on the Silicon Investor bulletin board there >is no reason to respond to questions that point out the >fundamentals of RMIL are troubling. To each question of >this variety there should be three questions returned. > >1) How does an investor request share delivery? >2) What happens when the total float is delivered and there > are still remaining certificate delivery requests? >3) What steps can be taken to speed up certificate delivery? > >The above three questions provide an opportunity for nays >to "help" and "save" RMIL investors. If nays answer these >questions fine, if they refuse to answer the three questions, >they should not be answered. To engage in discussions of >personalities, ships and factories plays right into the hands >of the minions of Mork and can potentially result in evaporation >of solidarity, along with possible severe losses from selling. > >Lastly, assuming the halt ends, it is imperative that >further buying be executed because of the existence of short >shares; not because of what the company does or does not do! > >KEEP IN MIND THE GOAL AND CONDITION YOUR ACTIONS TO ALWAYS MOVE >TOWARD ACHIEVING THE GOAL; THIS WAY WE CAN WIN !!!

To: DJ Byrne who wrote (31902)	12/31/1997 12:43:00 PM
From: Just My Opinion	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 55532

DJ: Thanks..I am answering all of Ron"s posts from now on at the tpro thread. al

To: DJ Byrne who wrote (31902)	12/31/1997 3:03:00 PM
From: Hawkmoon	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 55532

DJ, Reread your post and admit that espressing a case of "sour grapes" on every thread the naysayers post to does VERY LITTLE for increasing the credibility of RMIL or its advocates. It is fairly clear that Al-len is posting with an agenda of his own. However, he conveniently omits the fact that I WARNED ALL OF YOU that your activities, combined with the "aggressive" press releases on the part of RMIL management, were leading you all down a very dangerous path to an SEC trading halt. But no one listened. And now you will all likely pay for not adhering to that warning and making this company accurately represent its status. Blame and harass the Nays all you want. It only degrades your cause in the public eye and brings that much more negative attention to what you all have sown. If the company had played it straight with the public in the first place, you likely wouldn't be where you are right now. But chastising the company's management apparently doesn't fit the plan. Happy New Year and better luck in 1998. Regards, Ron