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 : JMAR Technologies(JMAR) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Candle stick who wrote (4843)	1/26/1998 12:13:00 PM
From: timwa	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 9695

There are many loyal shareholders who also hold warrants. The Swiss shorting was unfair, though warrant holders should be prepared for such risks. I think the warrants should be extended and that there is a good chance of it, as I am not why the company first wanted to raise 10 million and then decided they only needed 3.4. Extending the warrants would be a way of raising the additional capital in the near future and having the new shares in the hands of loyal shareholders. If they had completed the placement it would have had a similar dilutive effect. Just my opinion.

To: Candle stick who wrote (4843)	2/1/1998 2:07:00 PM
From: Bilberry	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 9695

IMPORTANT NOTE, PLEASE READ Candle Stick, I did an investigation on your claim that the warrants would be dilutive immediately on the stock before they are even excercised. I called the company and checked out FASB 128 (accounting rules). Your claims are not completely valid in JMAR's case according to the company. The warrants must be IN THE MONEY, (the price of JMAR must be over 4.68 for them to have ANY dilutive effect. And then when they are in the money the dilutive effect is ONLY a percentage of the amount that they are IN THE MONEY. So there is no need to panic people on this issue. JMAR was already aware of your notes, and had the correct info prior to my call. So, everyone calm down. The price of JMAR will not be effected by extension or no extension. Candle Stick, please look more deeply into the rules, as this kind of posting is misleading to some. I just want to say that I have appreciated your posts on JMAR, and continue to look forward to your posts in the future. Lets set this straight. If you have any questions regarding the FASB ruling, call JMAR's CFO. Candle Stick, you said: Accounting rules for '98 have changed and JMAR must report earnings on a fully diluted basis* going forward and that means counting the warrants as if they were already shares..* I checked out previous 10k and annual reports and warrants ARE NOT included in their fully diluted or regular earnings calculations. So if the rules say that it must be fully diluted, then there is really no change from before in JMAR's case. --Bilberry