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 : Globalstar Telecommunications Limited GSAT -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Cosmo Daisey who wrote (254)	1/13/1998 12:21:00 AM
From: Maurice Winn	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 29986

Hello Space Flower, Admittedly Globalstar is still just wishful thinking on the ground, but success looks likely. $30 is not really that low when you consider it was trading at $25 about 9 months ago. People buy, people sell. Prices go up and down. It doesn't affect the company prospects. No worries. Volatility is likely to remain a way of life until the phones have sold in the million and profits start to look like real dollars on the profit line, though we could have a philosophical discussion on whether dollars or Globalstar shares are more like smoke. I think Globalstar is way past the smoke stage - that was when CDMA was still unproven, GSTRF was $6 [split from $12], profits were half a decade away and the future was unpredictable. Of course, the future is all buttoned down now in a Globalstar Concept Partner's safe somewhere. I'm a smoke-holding long value investor. If people sell at $30, I might just be tempted to buy more. Actually, I saw a good post yesterday which included a 1950s article by Alan Greenspan on the Gold Standard, currencies, crashes etc. If I can find it, I'll put an url here. Briefly, I think money is pretty much finished as a store of value and might even lose its use as a means of exchange. Money used to be gold backed - paper could be exchanged for a real object people valued. So much better to use paper backed by productive capacity of cellphones, cars, oil, intellectual property and real stuff that doesn't just sit there in a vault. One day, Nasdaq, New York Stock Exchange or individual companies, or groups, might start issuing their own tradeable bits of electronic data or paper which people could use as a store of value AND a means of exchange. Cut out the Fed, the banks, the tax people and many other sticky fingered bandits. Money is having a little flurry of acceptance just now, but watch the central banks get printing roaring. Japan has announced a few hundred billion dollars worth of printing already. USA will follow - which will help keep exchange rates in balance, help stop the debtors getting into too much trouble, lower interest rates, avoid deflation. I like deflation - everything should be cheap in my book, but that's too hard to do just yet, though things are much easier to produce than they used to be. The Fed uses the fact that prices are stable or even reducing as an excuse to print more money. Who can blame the monopoly holder of the money tree from puting a bit of fertilizer on it and plucking a few more leaves to spend? So at the moment, shareholders seem to be losing, but look back over a couple of years, or decades, or centuries, and see whether money holders or shareholders are losing. In a few months, or maybe a year, shareholders will see the value of production relative to dollars start to climb again. Goodbye Money! You've had your day as a value store. Maurice Dow 8000 Feb 98 Dow 16 000 Feb 2002

To: Cosmo Daisey who wrote (254)	1/13/1998 12:51:00 AM
From: Maurice Winn	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 29986

fame.org Cosmo, There it is! You just need to click into that, then read what you like and then click into Alan Greenspan's old article, "Gold and Economic Freedom," which you'll see not far down the first page. This article originally appeared in a newsletter called The Objectivist in 1966. It was reprinted in the book Capitalism, the Unknown Ideal by Ayn Rand with additional articles by Alan Greenspan and Robert Hessen, Signet Books 1967, pages 96ff.. This book is still in print at popular bookstores and can be ordered from Amazon.com. Mqurice

To: Cosmo Daisey who wrote (254)	1/15/1998 5:01:00 PM
From: dougjn	Respond to of 29986

Say what? <ggg>

To: Cosmo Daisey who wrote (254)	1/18/1998 12:14:00 PM
From: brian h	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 29986

Cosmo, It is kind of late to response to your post since GSTRF has been back to its current level (share price). Regarding your "A concept company" concept, I would like to cut in from a financial standpoint. GSTRF is not a concept company anymore. It was a concept company when it was on its original drawing board. It was a concept stock when original partners invested several millions dollars on this project only. It was a concept company when its market value worths $2.5 billion a year ago when a full $2.7 billion financing was not there yet and no partners commited enough funds into this project. All of the above have been accomplished. It is no "a concept" anymore. Do you think these original partners, financial bankers, investment bankers, various countries telephone company's exec. are " dumb and dumber" than us investors here? Are they willing to spend $2.7 billion dollars for just attracting you and mine hard earned investment money only? Apprantly not. However, it does have a risk involved. That is why this company still not worth as much as it should be yet. Just wait for the day it is operational! I will tell you what companies on the market out there are "concept" companies. The most famous one is MSFT. I like the company but it worths $180 billion market value with a $11 billion sales. It is a great concept company for what it worths? Agree? I do not think this company will ever reach even half of what it worths in sales in my humble opinion. Then, whey does it worth that much? Does Mr. Bill Gate ever imagine to invest $2.7 billion dollars in the begining to start a company? Not. Take another example, "Yahoo", I invested in in because it is a concept company and get a great return. It is still a concept company because it worths $3.5 billion with $120 million sales. Will it ever reach a half of what it worths in sales? May be. Most likely not. That is why I get out. Did the original partners invest $ 2.7 billion to start a company? They got a graet concept. Agree? In fact, most of the start up companies are a concept company only. However, can you find any start up company now plans to spend $2.7 billion to be a concept company except Iridium and Globalstar? GSTRF WITH IT GRAET MARKETING PLAN AND GREAT EVERYTHING SHOULD WORTH MORE THAN WHAT IT WORTH NOW? AGREE? With a high degree of risk involved, of course. Good luck to all Brian H.