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 : Rocky Mountain Int'l (OTC:RMIL former OTC:OVIS) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Mr. Dendro who wrote (40065)	2/3/1998 12:53:00 AM
From: Just My Opinion	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 55532

Mr Dendro: I am not a stat man, but wouldn't it also be ridiculous to assume that they do NOT own the same number of shares? It would seem that the "universe" of 250? shareholders that Riley claims to have, would be large enough to make certain inferences from. Now, I am sure that there are some oddities, like the fact they may have more shares per person, because they were more sold on the proposition, to begin with. So that may weigh in the favor of them (the missing shareholders) NOT having the 13,000? shares the cartelians say they have. SO..where can we look? What is the average shareholdings for the average guy in the average bb stock? I have heard the figure somewhere that it is either 5000, or 8000 shares. So for argument's sake why doesn't everyone use either one of those figures? At least that way, once we have a figure everyone is comfortable with, we all can settle this, somewhat. Then we can move on to a different area of argument. I like the arguing as much as anyone else, but this one has gone on a long time, and I was hoping we all could come back to it, in say a week or two. TIA..al

To: Mr. Dendro who wrote (40065)	2/3/1998 1:09:00 AM
From: DJ Byrne	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 55532

Mr. Dendro You are now appearing IMO to justify your reasoning for wanting to loose money, or is it just because someone jumped on your case, that your posts usually go against the trend of most of the shareholders. This is why I say this and it is not to go against what you are doing for they are your shares and you can do whatever you want. No one forced you to buy the stock, but quit moaning. Even as a novice I can read into all the posts on squeezes and read the other articles on short squeezes, written by people that know how squeezes operate. It appears that the one reoccuring piece that permeates most of, if not all of them is to call for the certificates. So why complain about the squeeze, if you do not want to help to make it happen. This is why I find it very amusing when some of the nays talk against the squeeze, as I do not find there names tagged to any published data on whether they would know a squeeze if they tripped over one. dj this is getting "good to go"