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 : MIS International (NASD/BB: MISM) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Joe Sing who wrote (189)	2/23/1998 6:06:00 PM
From: Leroyt	Respond to of 264

Joe, I agree with your position on name calling. I have seen some other threads in SI and find they have degraded to worthlessness. I hope we call all state our opionions from whatever position we have. I hope this thread on MISM can be useful for ourselves and others in evaluating this stock. And, Joe, I am sorry to have heard of you bad experience with MISM and MIS.V. I am not quite sure why you, as a shareholder lost track of the company. Periodically, I was sent information or called the old company in Vancouver. I would have thought that all shareholders of late 1996 would have received the Proxy Statement of the Annual Meeting of January 13, 1997. Fortunately, the meeting occurred near my office in California so I attended. I was impressed with both Dan Masters and Wilfred Shaw at the time of that meeting. I have gained quite a bit of confidence in the present management but the finalization of the present deals will clearly be very reassuring. As I understand, the contracts are signed deals and the process just needs to happen. I think your dates of sale are wrong. You may have sold on July 27, 1997 when the price was low but close on August 27 was 0.42. Given what I knew was happening at MIS I couldn't figure out why anyone would be selling. I can see what you didn't pursue "Wilfred Shaw et al in federal court" because there wasn't much volume involved is my spotty records are correct. It is clearly my opinion that the present management of MIS has been delivering for the last year. I have substantially increased my position during that time and have a lot of confidence in the progress they are making. The finalization of the deals in the works will be reassuring to me but only slightly more than the level of confidence that I already have. MIS looks to have a solid future for those of us who have kept up with the times. Later, Leroyt

To: Joe Sing who wrote (189)	2/23/1998 6:20:00 PM
From: DCMTM	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 264

Joe, I have checked your statements as posted. There are no records of MIS buying the marketing rights to Wheel to Wheel. According to company sources Mr Copley never owned Wheel to Wheel they were bought from one of the founders who was an ex officer of MIS. They told me that there are no financial records of the transaction and Mr Copley never got 65k from MIS. They did say that there were some strange in/out payments with him that cancelled each other out. The records I am told were a mess from the old management.It seems that it was the ex officer who did not have any authority to make Copley any promises. Copley was a franchisee who was given the choice of going on his own or remaining in Wheel to Wheel when MIS bought it. Copley chose to go on his own rather than pay franchise royalties. He is also a good buddy of the person who sold MIS Wheel to Wheel. Does this sound like collusion (sorry for the typo) to you? I find it interesting that you make a statement against W Shaw. If you are who you say you are you will know that he was originally an investor who had no choice but to step in when he found out just how bad the management was at that time. Your comment against him makes your posts suspect as it was all the management who was forced out by Shaw and other shareholders. If it is true you are an ex investor than why bother posting about a company that was in a different business with other management. That is reckless and irresponsible. Do not blame the current company for its previous life. Also, the ex MIS officer was under investigation not part of a discipline hearing you twisted the words good on that one. Almost got me but I read you post again and asked the company. Joe if you are who you say you are I am sorry if you are offended however you make statements that are easily disproved and have no bearing on the current company. Brett