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: Andrew H who wrote (2747)	2/5/1998 3:17:00 PM
From: John R. Green	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 27968

If EPS is base for stock price A lot of the stocks should pay us to take shares. my own opinion.

To: Andrew H who wrote (2747)	2/5/1998 3:44:00 PM
From: John Fairbanks	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 27968

People keep mumbling about the dilution from the line of credit if Ira decides to use it but I think we're missing something here... HELLO! It's not like we're planning to borrow this to pay for day to day expenses! Anything we borrow against it will be used to aquire a company and add to the earnings of the corporation... which should hopefully counteract dilution. It's just like personal debt. If you go out and buy a bunch of clothes and such on a credit card, that is called destructive debt. If you borrow against your credit cards to start a business which allows you to pay back the cards and have a business to boot (a friend did this very successfully) that is called constructive debt. Dilution, as long as it is constructive, can be a very good thing since it improves the liquidity of the stock and the attractiveness the institutions... as long as the earnings are increasing with share count.

To: Andrew H who wrote (2747)	2/5/1998 3:46:00 PM
From: Brad	Read Replies (5) \| Respond to of 27968

Andrew, Common now... please. I believe you are a better person than that. You are letting stuff get to you. Many of us have had things said about us that are less than favorable. It is unfortunate. ALL of us (myself included) can stand to be better people if we choose to be. ----->>>> Now, on to my point. You said... ¯Brad suggests that since the shares will be restricted, it should not effect the price. However, that is just not so, since the additional shares will be calculated into the eps figure which, after all, is the primary basis for the stock price.® PLEASE READ (and quote) my complete point rather than selective excerpts. I ALSO said it is possible that they might NOT have to issue ANY shares at all as collateral. It could simply be done with warrants that might NEVER actually need to be exercised. One more point. EPS is not the "primary basis" for stock price. Supply vs. demand drives the price. EPS certainly plays a part, but if EPS was all there was to it, any company that was not making a profit would not even be trading. I think we will see a noticeable increase in demand sooner than many people think. Just my opinions, as always. Best wishes, Brad PS. No big deal, but just for the record Andrew, (ref post #2747) Ira Monas is the President. Arif Adam is the CEO.

To: Andrew H who wrote (2747)	2/5/1998 4:09:00 PM
From: CO	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 27968

Andrew, I think the company would be more inclined to use warrants in the first place. Warrants would not effect the eps calculation. IF they did use restricted shares, they would not be free trading shares and would not be added to the float. The stock price would not be effected nearly as much. The company would then have a year to use the money to acquire and add additional value to the company and then buy back the shares. The end result could be VERY positive. There are other factors that drive the price of a stock beside just the eps calculation. The law of supply and demand is a very stong force that drives the price of a stock. Cheryl