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 : AREE - Formerly TVSI -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Riley G who wrote (1579)	2/23/1998 7:51:00 PM
From: KMT	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 6528

RG: With what TVSI has, it deserves to be shorted naked. Heck, if I could do it, I would have shorted the heck out of it at $0.07 to $0.20 also knowing what I know now. BTW, I'm sure the MM's already new what I know now. That's why they gladly and profitably did what they did. (Not that it's ethical or legal of course.) And I'm sure they appreciate you, pugs, and the rest of the RMIL gang helping them do it with your wonderful promotion and recommendation of the company. Cheers, KMT

To: Riley G who wrote (1579)	2/23/1998 8:53:00 PM
From: Hawkmoon	Read Replies (4) \| Respond to of 6528

Riley, You are so full of it!!! I don't believe that ANY NAY has ever stated that manipulative short-selling never occurs. There are too many examples of it. What I believe the Nays ARE SAYING is that many scam companies are sheltering their own manipulations under the umbrella of alledged manipulative short selling. The problem is that all of your efforts in having shareholders take delivery of their certs would have easily busted the shorts. Instead, your little hype-stock made it to $4 and then went into distribution. If there was an illegal short position out there, the mmkrs would be scrambling over each other to put the hurt to their competition knowing that could jack up the prices and cost their rivals considerable monies. All you have is a halted alledged garment company that has lived up to none of the promises it publicly made in 1997. Now you are touting another alledged garment company reverse mergering with an alledged private firm doing some $300 million per annum in revenues. I think we all see your modus operandi... Regards, Ron