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 : FRANKLIN TELECOM (FTEL) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Martin P. Smith who wrote (25100)	1/14/1998 11:34:00 AM
From: VALUESPEC	Read Replies (4) \| Respond to of 41046

Martin, I've seen that type of story and heard it so many times I hopelessly a skeptic. I turely don't mean to offend those on this board. I would also point out that my first post was just to copy two paragraphs from the 10Q that were obviously disconcerting to read. One involved the revenues for the Sept 30, 1997 Q, and the other paragraph involved AT&T's litigation against the company. With that aside, I'm going to address each point you made in your last post to clarify my thinking on each subject: <<The CFO addressed the reason for the lack of sales in the same message you cite. Namely eval periods.>> The hype stocks always have an excuse. This is an old one. RACE keeps saying the same thing. I expressed my concerns on that board whent he stock was about $ 8. It is now $ 3.50. Maybe FTEL's product will sell great, but, IMO, the odds are steeply against that. <<The product was only available Oct 27th 97 so less than 1Q.>> That is almost one quarter (3 months from today's date). I think I said "about one quarter". <<I do not believe the convertibles were that badly priced. They were priced at an average of the stock price 30 days from the closure.>> Are you including the warrants, etc? I'll give more exact figures in a later post with documentation, either way, to see if I'm mistaken. <<The company did name the company for the 2.5 mill deal. It is Interine.>> I didn't catch that. Thanks. Who is Interine? Was eveyone disappointed when they found out who it was? << Why talk to COMS.>> Maybe my memory was wrong, but aren't they setting up something on their network, or something? <<FTEL has been named as BEST in show at a telephony conference for their product and praised for features nobody else has.>> This means very little. I hear these kinds of stories all the time. Look at RACE. They say the same (nothing ever happened). Look at AUGI, they said the same. Both stocks are worth WAY less than when these claims came out. However, maybe FTEL's dreams will materialize. Who knows? But the odds are WAY against it, IMO. <<FTEL sold the preffered stock to provide cash for the rollout of DVG's for FNET this was the clearly stated purpose of the issue.>> I think you are mistaken. Look at the balance sheet. The curent assets were less than the current liabilities. If they didn't raise cash quickly, they were going to be in big touble. Bankruptcy would most likely have followed, IMO. However, it is true that, in part, that the company raised money for FNET, etc., but you can be certain that they would have needed money regardless. <<IT is apparent from the lack of depth of your knowledge that your DD is either in the early stages or poorly done.>> In the early stages. Most of it is also off the top of my head, after reading the appropriate sources. It's not documented opinion, so I'd say its fair to say its poorly done. <<Either that or you have an ulterior motive.>> I understand why you might think so, but its not true. I'm a bit unusual, in that I take the time to post my findings on a company, even if I don't see much promise in it as a company (I may trade them anyway), but I'm not short, etc., this company. I hope I've clarified my points a little more with you. I hope to remind those on this thread that if FTEL is fundamentally sound, no matter what is said on this thread, it won't stop it from going up for long. If the postings here show negatives about this company, isn't it good to know them, too? You may still choose to keep the stock, but at least you'll understand your company better. From here on, I'll try to document the sources for my info better. I'll put the info in my website: valuespec.com when I gather things. It is not a for profit website, and you can see that by noticing I have no advertisers. In fact, I don't even know how many hits it gets (though I do plan to find out. It a new site, and I haven't looked). VALUESPEC valuespec.com