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 : FAMH - FIRAMADA Staffing Services -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Little Engine who wrote (2010)	1/27/1998 2:39:00 PM
From: skreiger	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 27968

Little Engine -- I don't feel as though I am your equal in issues such as the ones you have discussed at length on this thread, so I don't wish to debate you. You obviously have spent a lot of time crunching numbers and digging up every possible reason to dislike this company, its stock, and its management. However, would you care to address a statement in your most recent post where you assume FAMH has borrowed $25 MM from the European "financial concern"? I don't recall the press release, scant though it was, detailing the fact that the company had in fact borrowed the money at this point. My point is this: You apparently are compelled to dissect every statement, every bit of information coming from the company in an effort to discredit(?) what they're doing. I'm going to turn the tables and ask why you are advertising that the company has indeed borrowed this money already? Then I'll ask a question for you or anyone to answer: What group, foreign or otherwise -- named or unnamed, would extend such a line of credit to a company which, according to your assessment, is hardly worthy of such trust? I don't know the answer and, as I stated above, I am not qualified to debate you on this topic. But fair is fair and in my opinion, you have provided the same type of misleading information you continually claim FAMH provides. Regards, Scott

To: Little Engine who wrote (2010)	1/27/1998 3:00:00 PM
From: CO	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 27968

Little Engine, I think it is important for the people on this thread to know, so they can properly assess your input on this thread. Yes or No, a simple answer will do. Do you work for a market maker or broker in any way shape or form? I've stated many times that I am an individual investor with no ties to FAMH whatsoever. Cheryl

To: Little Engine who wrote (2010)	1/27/1998 3:04:00 PM
From: Lurker	Respond to of 27968

Your figures all seem right on. Since you don't like FAMH (as an investment), what stocks do you like?

To: Little Engine who wrote (2010)	1/27/1998 3:37:00 PM
From: lowell	Respond to of 27968

Little Engine: You must be reading my mind. I had the exact comments as you (regarding the $45 mil vs. $60 mil and the EU "financial concern") One point people keep overlooking here is the missing 0.02 EPS. For three quarters, FAMH had .12 EPS. For the entire year FAMH has (supposedly) .10 EPS. That means in the fourth quarter FAMH LOST 0.02 cents. WHY??? That also means (and I hate to dwell on this) that FAMH is claiming a NET profit margin higher than 35 percent (0.12 cents/ 3 Qrts worth of revenue). Ira - if you are reading these posts, PLEASE put these questions to rest!!! Regards, Lowell

To: Little Engine who wrote (2010)	1/27/1998 4:00:00 PM
From: Jonathan Lebed	Respond to of 27968

Little Engine, DO NOT...and I repeat DO NOT disguise yourself in the FAMH Chat Room just to bash the stock. I saw that you did it last time but this time you will be banned. I am also pretty sure you post w/2 names here on SI already. Everyone, If you enter the chat room....use your REAL NAME or your SI name if you have SI....Thank You! Great news out today...but the company who is doing the purchasing, always seems to fall. JLebed

To: Little Engine who wrote (2010)	1/27/1998 5:09:00 PM
From: Andrew H	Respond to of 27968

>>I do, however, think that the pattern of deception from FAMH is well-established by now. Everything they say they will do, from issuing press releases to opening offices, takes longer than they promise. Does anyone here REALLY believe they will see audited financials on Feb. 2? << While many of your questions and points are quite legitimate, the "pattern of deception" comment is unfair. This is not the Paula Jones case. Just because the company is a bit late with their timelines is no reason to assume deception. This is very common among small companies in their business dealings. All kinds of delays come up. Perhaps the company should be giving no hints of their upcoming dealings, but then we wouold be criticising them for that. From my limited knowledge of the company, so far it appears to me they have substantially made good on their promises. We shall see what the future brings. But I think your questions are entirely valid and would like to see them answered myself.

To: Little Engine who wrote (2010)	1/27/1998 10:04:00 PM
From: Richard V Davis	Respond to of 27968

Little Engine; It is quite interesting to note your complete silence to the responses which posters have provided to your questions. Why no response? Are you so very very committed to destroying the value of this company that you will mis-state a press release to indicate a borrowing which has not been stated as having happened? Are you a broker, market maker, manipulator or stock shorter? Do you have anything to do with the finance industry or are you an individual investor as I am? As Cheryl is? Where are your pontifications? Why can you not answer simple straightforward factual questions? Do you not see a positive in the fact that some entitity is willing to put forward 25 million dollars to back FAMH's growth? Any person with any sense (and I know that you have a logical mind) must see such as a ringing endorsement of all aspects of this company. I for one expect you answer my questions completley, as I have always answered yours to me. I look forward to your response. Rick