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 : Naxos Resources (NAXOF) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Neal davidson who wrote (9540)	3/10/1998 6:51:00 PM
From: Anne Lamb	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 20681

common excuses/myths seen on most all silicon investor threads. 1. The news is SOOO big..they are scared to release it.. <if this is the case..have at it..we all have our nitro patches> 2. The management is driving the stock down on purpose so their friends or big investor can get a deal..<if they had friends they would have gotten in years ago> 3. Be calm..nothing has changed since the last PR <so what they been doing all this time?> 4 Its Christmas,er..New Years..hmm..Ground Hog Day!..lessee..Valentines!..well..Presidents day! wait...theyre late cause of ELLLL NIIIINNNNNNO! okok..just kidding..These are the times that try men's souls.. look..if they had something they could report..they would report it..slamming the company may be a bit misguided here..if something isnt coming up right..i hope they keep at it til they get it right.. and please..dont <and they wont> announce we are having problems..sheesh.. you want this at 50 cents?far as i'm concerned..you can keep me in the dark a while if it preserves the price oh well..JMHO..FWIW :)

To: Neal davidson who wrote (9540)	3/11/1998 8:37:00 AM
From: Hyperknowledge	Respond to of 20681

<Carlo: Management owns more shares than anyone else...why would they want to have a PP at a low price and dilute their own monetary interest? That does not make sense, as long as you are willing to assume that management has its own interests in mind. And if you are willing to assume that management has all shareholders' interest in mind, then negotiating a PP at such a low price really makes no sense. JMHO> A general item, posted on other threads, may be of interest to you -- I don't suggest it is relevant in this case. The practice is sometimes called the "Founder's Flip" or "FF" scheme. A large (often founding) stockholder can sell low cost stock at eg $4-6, knocking the market price down, then replace those shares via a PP at $3 or so. The new PP also includes warrants. Net effect: "buyer" can pocket the profit pulled out of the public marketplace, transfer the initial cost and perhaps part of the profits to the company via the PP, actually increase "buyer's" overall share/warrant position (the dilution is negligible to the "buyer"), and "buyer" looks like hero for "funding the company". Over time, the "buyer" funds the company, pulls out huge profits, and still increases his share position. 3 critical requirements: know in advance when PP's will be done; be "in the know" regarding pending news; have confidence the game will continue so that the warrants can be exercised a year or 2 hence. Who gets impacted: the small public investor sees a lowering of the share price and a dilution of the stock, but may benefit from the funds available to the company. How to tell: look at who has taken PP's and then look at insider reports for consistent sellers during the periods prior to PP's. Unfortunately, shell accounts are often used to hide the ID of these sellers; therefore, no insider reports are required, and the link is hidden. The exchanges occasionally track down this type of trading and may take action: in the US, the penalties can include loss of the gains; Vancouver and Alberta have very bad reputations for actually doing anything more than wrist-slaps like trading suspensions. This may all be irrelevant to the current firm you are invested in, but it is good to be aware of the practice.