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 : Corporate Vision (CVIA) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: D LEE who wrote (1453)	1/6/1998 11:55:00 AM
From: Milk	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 6654

* from "KAA": CVIA Clearing House Entry#2 * I just received an email from a non-SI member. I'll post it on the web page tonight. Here it is: From: "K A A" <andersonmakaticorp@email.msn.com> To: <milk000@hotmail.com> Subject: CVIA Website Date: Mon, 5 Jan 1998 14:47:43 -0500 Hello Milk Great Job on the CVIA website. My company owns some CVIA shares and we are non SI members, but follow the thread from time to time. We too, have asked Mr Arnold many of the same questions you are attempting to answer, he should appreciate your efforts so that he doesnt have to answer the same questions 100 times per day. One important question he answered for us was regarding.... issuing reg S shares (and this is a cut and paste of his answer) "A Reg. S stock issue is a possibility, but only as a last resort. Real growth, in my opinion, cannot be achieved by extensive use of this type of program." I hope this question and answer is one you will feel is a help and feel free to post it if you already havent addressed this issue. Take Care K. A. Anderson

To: D LEE who wrote (1453)	1/10/1998 2:46:00 PM
From: D LEE	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 6654

To Mikemct1 Re: CVIA Clearing House Entry#1 partial answer to see Mikes question, go to: Message 3086161 Hi mike I'll try to start on your question by defining a "back drop" for the elements of competition in this situation. There is no insider information and these are simply ideas in my head from what I've read in previous posts. Please realize I've wondered about it the only way I choose to out of necessity. I am thinking backwards because it's Jack Arnold's self appointed job to know "what he does" and at present to make sure that we don't. Conjecture is the name of the game for stockholders and the rest of us until his strong hold of agreements is set up to begin expressing itself. "At that point" the news will out by itself soon anyway, in a manner as unimportant as necessary, or a moment sooner as a matter of courtesy to those who have been waiting, and for those who are legally supposed to be informed. They will not say they have invented anything, or hold a unique patent or any other rite no one can infringe upon which gives them value. Nor will they say anything to encourage people to believe the value of the cvia effort is less than presently expressed in the price of the shares. They will not even join soon in the way most people expect when we hear the word merger. They will join forces in the simplest way possible, and naturally, in a way beneficial to all, more through an on going union of agreement and in an easily reproduced process. This too is out of necessity. In other words, and in terms of any Acquisition, CVIA shareholders may soon be realizing "the acquisition of long term customers", rather than gaining the responsibility of their operations. News we have heard to date refers to the final goal as described in that news. It is focusing on the separate geographical points of sale (the mom & pops) and what they will be able to do in the future with regard to the CVIA proposal. This part to me is less interesting, though it will cause investors to take notice when it happens, and any increase in shares from this should be compensated for by the added value any mom & pop brings to the stock base when they take advantage so I don't view that part as dilution or justifying change in the price of the stock except for the apperance of progress. I am trying to focus instead on what CVIA can do in this environment that the mom & pops can't, which naturally makes CVIA's roll totally different from theirs, and how CVIA might play its part most efficiently by capitalizing on simplicity. In terms of CVIA's present condition, they must truly use simplicity every step of the way to achieve progress. That fact alone is helping me come to these conclusions. It looks to me like things could work out fine, and with some extras that Jack is talking about. With hopes of less interference from the outside, (some things are better left unsaid), I'm admittedly dragging my feet on your question, mike. Also hoping others will give it much thought and the comments it deserves. Now that it seems to make absolutely no sense, I will think about it once again from another perspective. in terms of the competition itself, when I post next. I also understand Mr. Arnold, as the captain of his effort, scans SI from time to time. I don't really consider my comments crucial to any development but should he become annoyed or feel the stuff I'm guessing about is inappropriate or misleading enough to desire that I stop, I will link a one word message to mikes question "discontinued". I am not a stockholder but realize that most of you guys are, so I don't want add confusion. (Dumb to say, but who knows? I'm only sure Mikemct1's question is obviously important for the investors.) dave Mike. As to: "what percent of market share do the merger canidates have?": I would say practially 0. It's got to be on the local or geographical level that market shares become significant however, and that figure will have meaning. If each mom & pops market share is small in their own area of possible customers, it wouldn't scare me away. Rather, it would justify my interest further because that is something they will be striving to improve through this business proposition. ("mom & pop" is just a term i'm using and shouldn't be interpreted to mean insignificant)