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 : Crystallex (KRY) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Mama Bear who wrote (6433)	3/7/1998 6:18:00 PM
From: flightlessbird	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 10836

Babs: Mr Assensio is counting on such reliance/blind devotion. :) eom

To: Mama Bear who wrote (6433)	3/7/1998 7:25:00 PM
From: alan miller	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 10836

Barb: I appreciate your views regarding Asensio's success record - it has served you well. However, this is beginning to emerge as a clearly staged effort to cover a position taken at US5.00 at an unacceptable risk level. Current research indicates that IF Asensio initiated short at 5.00, then he MUST activate this coverage at precisely this time - it may well be a devastating loss if he doesn't for either him or his clients. With regard to the research published recently by Asensio: I would refer to the KRY [http://www.crystallex.com] website newsrelease of June 15, 1997 and (other or less biased) sources of information to confirm that Asensio's statement with regard to ownership vis-a-vis the up-coming ruling is indeed not for ownership. He is absolutely correct on the surface of the issue - the complex and definitive ruling is admission of rights. What he has yet to address (I have made several requests for clarification from him without response) is the May 15th, 1997 CSJ gazetting that clearly affirms the legality of Mael's (KRY's) ownership by transfer of title. He has yet to clearly demonstrate an understanding of the full and final legal authority of the CSJ and without it, his arguments remain invalid. The method whereby the May 15th decision was reached is UTTERLY irrelevant - it remains final and without appeal. I would strongly recommend independent research on this stock with regards to the Las Cristinas properties - it is highly complex and open to misrepresentation with perhaps very dire consequences for the not fully informed and that especially includes short sellers. Included here is a biased compilation of recent miscalls by Asensio: geocities.com regards, am

To: Mama Bear who wrote (6433)	3/7/1998 11:22:00 PM
From: Fulvio Castelli	Read Replies (4) \| Respond to of 10836

How was I to know you didn't like Babs? I'd never even heard of you before you came on to this thread. And 'BarbPain' ... cute. Speaking of cute names, you should see some of the names I came up with for TheChief. Eh, Chief? ;-) And in keeping with the express wishes of my good friend Poca-taunt-us, I would like to announce to one and all that I am turning over a new leaf! A kinder, gentler Fulvio has emerged, but a Fulvio whose kindness and gentleness is wrought in strength! Like a sword of Damascus steel, I have been forged in the fires of the hells of recent battle! Now, rising as a phoenix from the ashes, I spread my new wings and proudly display my resplendent plumage for all to see! Gaze and behold the wonder that is the new Fulvio! And whether or not I revert to my old nasty hawk-like self to scrape and claw you swine into bloody submission is entirely up to those who would spread lies and deceit on this forum! Aaaarrrrrrgggggghhhhhhhhh!! (Ummmm...sorry for all the prose people. You see, I'm desperately trying to steal Damon Wright's editorial job and I really need the practice. Hope I haven't nauseated too may of you. Do you think I use too many exclamation marks? Haven't quite got the hang of it yet -- I flunked that damned creative writing class!) Let's see, where was I? Oh yeah, Barb. Anyway now that we've got the name stuff out of the way, I was wondering if I could get you to go back and answer my earlier questions? I think we could both benefit from the answers and any subsequent dialogue. Another thing. I've just finished reading all of your posts from today. It seems you really like to harp on the fact that you've seen this all very often. That we're reacting in the same way that you've seen countless times whenever Asensio unleashes his dogs on a stock. Well, obviously a lot of the reactions are going to be the same; it's just human nature after all. But I think that what we have here is a little different. I really don't know much about the other plays that you mention, or the investors who defended them, but we've built up a pretty solid community of interested investors around this stock. And we communicate and share information with each other a LOT. A group that, truth be told, has done a lot of work digging up information on KRY. In fact, this is the main reason that we are repeatedly accused of being a cult! :-) But it is this group effort, and the due diligence performed by this group, that has made us very confident. So while you may be absolutely right that this is par for the course, I'm willing to wait and see how events unfold before passing judgement. I am also encouraged to hear you admit that Asensio is due for a bad call. Obviously I'm biased, but all indications are that this may very well be it. Adopt an impartial perspective and re-read all of the material that we've posted on Asensio's position on KRY (especially his initial thoughts to 'arbitrage' this stock). I really don't believe it will convince you to change your mind (after all you're just as guilty as what you accuse us of -- being over-confident about your position), but it might make you think a bit. Oh, and one last thing. His entry point is no big secret. He called Ken Holeski and told him he was shorting KRY when it was around $5. No guess work here Barbara. FWIW.