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 : Rocky Mountain Int'l (OTC:RMIL former OTC:OVIS) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Rich_1 who wrote (42433)	2/24/1998 4:27:00 PM
From: Hawkmoon	Respond to of 55532

Rich_1, The problem with your scenario is that Mmkrs are usually not foolish enough to naked short a stock that has a float being reduced by shareholders taking delivery. You guys were broadcasting your plan out here for all to see and they would have had to be insane to continue shorting this stock. A more likely scenario is that Morgan/Breton were dumping some of those 2 million shares of S-8 stock that they wrote out to themselves last spring into the buying. When you finally see the financials for this company (if you ever do), I think you will see this selling activity reflected. That is why I can't believe more shareholders haven't taken this company to task and filed suit in order to initiate discovery proceedings against RMIL management. They will continue to buy off shareholders as long as possible before the SEC declares that RMIL shareholders are eligible for class action lawsuit status. Listen.. if you have a short squeeze in place now, why don't you all get together and sue the company in order to force them to divulged insider trading activities?? If they are on the level, then you can always withdraw the lawsuit. Either way it makes no difference to the scenario. You all are spending way too much time defending a management team that has blatantly lied to each and every one of you. There is no reason that RMIL has not released a 10Q for the last quarter of 1997. It doesn't have to be audited but it has to be correct in order to prevent the SEC from clamping down on them legally. I can understand why the 10K is delayed due to the costs involved in auditing, but a 10Q costs relatively little and would go far to sustaining managements credibility. Quit nipping at those who forced the company to come clean and start putting a little more pressure on management. Regards, Ron