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: Robert K. Sims who wrote (2072)	1/7/1998 12:07:00 PM
From: tech	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 3391

I own shares in CSGI and I post my opinions. I also support my opinions with related articles and fundamental analysis. Is quite a different story if I just came out and said this company is a great company and everyone should buy it just because. I support my positions with evidence and when I post numbers and potential LOC that CSGI may get, I always make sure to post extremely conservative numbers. For God SAKES! the post I made regarding our alliance partners and how much code we may get from them was based on each only getting 4 contracts in all of 1998! THAT IS A RIDICULOUSLY LOW FIGURE TO USE. Even when I used the multiples I made sure I only used x 30 and x 40. Even though most y2k companies trade with multiples that are higher. If you remember on the ALYD thread, most of the posters took the 1998 and 1999 revenue projections Gruder made and dismissed them by saying they were to conservative. We saw them replaced by all sorts or wild assumptions. I have made valid points and have provided support for my position. If you want to call that hype then it is your decision. I am confident that my views are correct and that ConSyGen will get their share of the mass amounts of business that is still out there.

To: Robert K. Sims who wrote (2072)	1/7/1998 12:32:00 PM
From: angel	Respond to of 3391

It was more than a year ago Robert when there was first hype that a NASDAQ listing would come "any day now". I wrote about it and found it and cut and copied it here again for you to see before Tech calls me a lier again. Since Steve says also that he called the company and investor firm I think maybe now in retrospect he was telling the truth and the reason it died was because the NASD investigation killed the deal before anything official was done on it. That would make sense to me because it was after that that the litigation paragraph appears in their filings. +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++= I have been busy doing my CSGI reading. I can't believe anyone fell for this crap. I love it! This guy Steve Sprunger and Shawn Murphy are two of the biggest clowns I have ever read. Listen to this. A guy named Joe asks Steve "Do you have any idea if/when they will get approval for a NASDAQ listing?" and Steve makes it sound really close saying "The last I heard was that the company needed to trade for thirty days or more as a bulletin board stock at a price greater than three dollars. I believe this was one of the reasons the stock was first offered at $3.50. There were several other hoops the company had to jump through and some paper work to fill out. There were going to be more announcements from the company after the listing process was complete. CSGI has already been trading for over a month so I don't believe we should be waiting too much longer for them to get the listing. I haven't heard anything new since my last post. If I hear anything I will be sure to post it." Later Steve says "I have also heard that the stock may be part of an upcoming CNBC broadcast, but that may not happen until after they have the actual NASDAQ listing." "I firmly believe this company will gain the momentum needed to break $100 a share by late next year." (He meant by now in 1997) Shawn then comes back and says "Steve, I have also heard about the CNBC segment....The Segment has already been taped and is ready to air...have not heard anything about the NASDAQ listing, but it could hapen any day... I have also heard the company has another contract." Later he says "The NASDAQ listing has almost been completed should happen within a one to two week period." A few days later he says "mid-Dec". Questions 1) Why does Steve refer to Shawn Murphy as "Scott"? Comments 1) No NASDAQ ever happened but they kept hyping it 2) Steve was off by "only" $94 a share 3) No contract was ever announced. 4) It gets worse but I dont have time now to write. I want to also write now questions for the meeting