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: MRothaus1 who wrote (5048)	2/11/1998 8:42:00 PM
From: Richaaard	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 9695

Michael, I agree with your views on warrants and a $5.00 strike price. I don't entirely subscribe to the artificial ceiling theory that I've seen on SI a number of times though. Strong earnings will blow through that ceiling. We had weak earnings the last time we hit the $4.50 area. Also, people who are worrying about dilution should realize that most investors are smart enough to consider a large jump in revenue and earnings, even if it doesn't translate out to an improvement in earnings per share. The dilution will be a non-issue if sales & revenues keep improving.

To: MRothaus1 who wrote (5048)	2/11/1998 9:21:00 PM
From: Dale Kohler	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 9695

Michael- I agree with you that the company should do what is in their best interests, that is why I argued against the extension. JMAR hasn't expressed any critical need for more capital. In their last annual report they had 5.7 million dollars, DARPA just gave them some with more to come, we have been making profit, and last year they paid off I believe more than half of their long term debt lowering that number to only $660,000. A company which makes a concerted effort to pay off debt ahead of time is a company in no great need of money. Any supposed need for money was created on this board as an excuse to push for the warrant extension. Read the release again. Martinez makes it clear that he only extended the warrants because he was pressured by people who cajoled him into showing compassion on those 'loyal shareholders who also owned warrants'. Mr. Martinez' personable attitude toward warrantholders was quoted by a member of this board as his having no concern for gamblers. Mr. Martinez' distaste for this entire affair, I think, is conveyed by the timing of the news release. His company normally airs it's releases at 12:30pm...the middle of the market day. This release was announced at 8:00pm...four hours after the market closed. Does that sound like a man proud of his decision? Dale

To: MRothaus1 who wrote (5048)	2/13/1998 2:47:00 PM
From: Linda Kaplan	Respond to of 9695

There isn't actually a $5 rule. It's a bit more complicated than that. A stock can be declared marginable by the Feds and if it goes lower than $5 certain brokers will offer margin on it, as each brokerage follows its own rules. I have a stock that became marginable at Ameritrade this week because it rose to 2.5 a share! I suppose that the Feds had approved it marginable at some time when the price was higher, but it had gone lower. Another of my brokers, Waterhouse, gives margin to stocks over 4-1/16, and another of my brokers, Brown & Co, uses 5. Ameritrade uses 2 or something a bit over 2. Linda