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.

Gold/Mining/Energy : American Eco (ECGOF, ECX on Toronto exchange) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Francois H. Gaston who wrote (1746)	2/20/1998 12:51:00 PM
From: Raymond James Norris	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 2841

Eco looking strong with 100k traded at 12:50 and stock up to 11.75. Would be nice to close at 12 or above over the weekend on good volume since this usually brings in buyers who see it closing at resistance. With earnings due out next week, all bodes very well for Eco...... Oh, BTW, if you've been counting, Eco has announced well into the 100 million dollar range in related contracts and works announced in this quarter alone. Conservatively Yours, Raymond J. Norris

To: Francois H. Gaston who wrote (1746)	2/20/1998 7:27:00 PM
From: Michael Anthony	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 2841

>>Michael... I said >>Actually they might position themselves for a lawsuit.<< I meant against ECGOF itself.... if they are not careful about their wording.<< I did get your meaning. My point was that their wording, as long as it is factual, is not relevant to a lawsuit against them. If they are being truthful(and I have no reason to think they aren't), then DBCO seems much more likely to be in the wrong and Eco doesn't have anything to worry about. It seemed pretty obvious to me and DBCO shareholders alike that DBCO management obviously is where the problem was in stalling this deal. Eco has nothing to hide and should be able to communicate to it's shareholders exactly why the announced deal is on hold. If the truth hurts DBCO's price, so be it. You can't be sued for telling the truth (IMO) to your shareholders. I'm not so sure that applies to DBCO's camp though :)