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 : CSGI ...READY FOR TAKE-OFF! -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: tech who wrote (1883)	1/5/1998 10:18:00 AM
From: Trader X	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 3391

tech said <<I did not use the bollinger bands for my analysis, I just posted what they were at.>> How in the world does one post the Bollinger Bands in a TA analysis and then claim they were not used in the analysis? Why on earth would you even post it, if it was not part of the analysis? tech: * Move 2 spaces back and lose a turn for misuse of tech-speak.

To: tech who wrote (1883)	1/5/1998 10:44:00 AM
From: Trader X	Respond to of 3391

LEGAL PROCEEDINGS The National Association of Securities Dealers, Inc. ("NASD") in December 1996 advised the Company that it is conducting a routine review of trading in ConSyGen-Texas' common stock following the acquisition of ConSyGen-Arizona. The NASD made a written inquiry of the Company, to which the Company responded in writing in January 1997. The NASD made inquiry with respect to, among other things, a private placement by ConSyGen-Arizona, the acquisition of ConSyGen-Arizona by ConSyGen-Texas, and the issuance of common stock by the Company during 1996. The NASD has not yet responded in writing to the Company's written response. Although it is not possible to determine the outcome of this review, the outcome could have a material adverse effect on the Company and the price of and trading market for the Company's common stock." Right, they didn't call it an "investigation", it was called a "review". In any event, the "review" is still open. Unresolved. Why? tech wrote: If you fail to (call the NASD) you are purposely, intentionally, and knowingly, posting false and misleading information. Wait a minute while I catch my breath from laughing too hard! Now you're a lawyer too! Congratulations! I always knew you had it in you. -Kevin

To: tech who wrote (1883)	1/6/1998 12:37:00 AM
From: Trader X	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 3391

TECH IS POSTING FALSE AND MISLEADING INFORMATION Whenever he mentions the NASD review, he says: <<NASD ROUTINE REVIEW (that was done over a year ago)>> and <<this review that happened over a year ago>> techstocks.com LIE. The review is STILL open as of Dec. 8 in this SEC filing: edgar-online.com where it says: NASD REVIEW. The National Association of Securities Dealers, Inc. ("NASD") in December 1996 advised the Company that it was conducting a review of trading in the Company's Common Stock following the acquisition of ConSyGen, Inc., a privately held Arizona corporation ("ConSyGen-Arizona"). The NASD made a written inquiry of the Company to which the Company responded in writing in January 1997. The NASD made inquiry with respect to, among other things, a private placement by ConSyGen-Arizona, the acquisition of ConSyGen-Arizona by the Company, and issuances of Common Stock by the Company during 1996. The NASD has not yet responded in writing to the Company's written response. Subsequent to the Company's written response, the NASD made verbal inquiries primarily focused on participation by NASD members in private placements. The NASD has not made any inquiry of the Company for approximately eight months. The outcome of the NASD review could have a material adverse effect on the Company and the price of and trading market for the Company's Common Stock. -- THE LENGTH OF THIS INVESTIGATION IS SUSPICIOUS, AND MAY BE DUE TO THE NASD TURNING IT OVER TO THE SEC FOR INVESTIGATION.