SI
SI
discoversearch

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 : PWAV- the hot new IPO -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: RFJock who wrote (723)1/24/1998 6:50:00 AM
From: Brian K. Winchell  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 1491
 
Just a bit of news while we are speaking of SPCT:

BE WELL
BRIAN

To All Persons or Institutions Who Acquired Spectrian Corporation Common Stock Between July 17, 1997 and October 27, 1997, Inclusive

NEW YORK, Jan. 23 /PRNewswire/ -- On January 23, 1998, a shareholder securities class action lawsuit was filed in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California against Spectrian Corporation (Nasdaq: SPCT), ("Spectrian" or the "Company"), Garrett A. Garrettson (President and Chief Executive Officer of Spectrian), and Bruce Wright (Chief Financial Officer of Spectrian), on behalf of purchasers of the common stock of Spectrian between July 17, 1997 and October 23, 1997, inclusive, by the law firms of Schoengold & Sporn, P.C., Berman, DeValerio, Pease and Tabacco, and Cohen Milstein Hausfeld & Toll, PLLC.

The complaint charges defendants with violations of the federal securities laws (Sections 10-b(5) and 20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934) by virtue of their misrepresentation and/or omission of material information concerning the Company's business and revenues, including material information concerning Spectrian's problems with its power amplifiers, that resulted in the loss of millions of dollars worth of business, thereby artificially inflating the price of Spectrian common stock. In addition, plaintiffs allege that corporate insiders, including Garrettson, an "insider" and control person of Spectrian, reaped millions of dollars by improperly selling shares of Spectrian common stock at artificially inflated prices while in the possession of materially adverse facts.

Plaintiffs seek to recover damages on behalf of the class members, and are represented by the law firms of Schoengold & Sporn, P.C., 233 Broadway, New York, New York 10279, Tel.: 212-964-0046, Fax: 212-267-8137, E-Mail: SCHOENGOLD@AOL.COM; Berman, DeValerio, Pease & Tabacco, 425 California Street, San Francisco, California 94104, Tel.: 415-433-3200, Fax: 415-433-6382, E-Mail: BDPTLAW@AOL.COM; and Cohen Milstein Hausfeld & Toll, PLLC, 999 Third Avenue, Suite 3600, Seattle, Washington 98104, Tel.: 888-240-1238 or 206-521-0080, Fax: 206-521-0166, E-Mail: STOLL@SITECONNECT.COM, which all have extensive experience and expertise prosecuting class actions on behalf of investors and shareholders.

If you are a member of the class described above, you may seek to join in the above class action, or, no later than sixty (60) days from December 24, 1997, move the Court to serve as lead plaintiff.

If you have any questions regarding this action, or wish to join in this matter or discuss your rights or interests in this matter, you may call collect or otherwise contact any of the undersigned:

Schoengold & Sporn, P.C.

Samuel P. Sporn, Esq.

Joel P. Laitman, Esq.

Christopher Lometti, Esq.

Jay P. Saltzman, Esq.

233 Broadway

New York, NY 10279

Tel: 212-964-0046

Fax: 212-267-8137

E-Mail: SCHOENGOLD@AOL.COM

Berman, DeValerio, Pease & Tabacco

Joseph J. Tabacco, Jr., Esq.

Jennifer Abrams, Esq.

425 California St.

San Francisco, CA 94104

Tel: 415-433-3200

Fax: 415-433-6382

E-Mail: BDPTLAW@AOL.COM

Cohen Milstein Hausfield & Toll, PLLC

Steve Toll, Esq.

999 Third Avenue

Suite 3600

Seattle, WA 98104

Tel: 888-240-1238

206-521-0080

Fax: 206-521-0166

E-mail: STOLL@SITECONNECT.COM

SOURCE Shoengold & Sporn, P.C.

CO: Spectrian Corp.



To: RFJock who wrote (723)1/25/1998 5:45:00 PM
From: Rob L.  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 1491
 
RF, I wonder if you can shed some light to the Nokia deal? I am not an expert in this field and wonder which products that Nokia could incorporate the PWAV boxes in. I mean, is it a big market or just some small niche? What I'm thinking is - as Nokia provides network systems to different operators around the world (these deals are usually huge), is it as easy as saying then that, in theory, PWAV could supply their amps in all systems that Nokia deliver whenever a systems sale is made by Nokia? I'm not looking for the undisputed truth, just a possible scenario, in theory and as simple as possible (I'm not a technical guru...)



To: RFJock who wrote (723)1/26/1998 8:31:00 AM
From: Dr. J  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 1491
 
Great info - thanks! Does something PWAV has no experience with and/or could survive w/the product they now ship mean you think that they can't get NT qualified with their current product; if not, why not? Is this a quality issue, or design issue?

Back in a previous posting, you characterized PWAV as having ho-hum products, but great manufacturing and SPCT the opposite. What matters to customers - or does it change customer by customer and deal by deal?