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: Ed Lamb who wrote (9644)	3/11/1998 8:37:00 PM
From: Jan A. Van Hummel	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 20681

NO NEED FOR PANIC !!! It is very simple. If the information by Shadow is correct our shares are likely worth zilch because there aren't enough buyers around to pick up the available shares. So why even try to sell? What is the difference between 0.00 and 0.05? There are two issues: The information about JJ's removal. If incorrect, we know Shadow lied. If correct, Shadow may have had an alternative motive. Shadow very coincidentally registers today and immediately rings the alarm. Very coincidentally we get a posting by a Mr. Yuben Hadigen or better spelled: Y(o)u be(e)n Had as he already remarked in his post. Also, he happens to know there will be a release on April 1 (fool's day), which is also more than two weeks away. Actually, this post causes the Shadow post to be more suspect. For all intents and purposes NAXOS management can quickly resolve the JJ question. If he is gone, they should explain immediately. Failing to do so is a dereliction of their judiciary duty with which we, as shareholders, have entrusted them. I am sure there are some legal terms that would fit the occasion if this indeed the case. If JJ is not gone why the Shadow and why You Been Had(igen)? If the stock drop quickly to 1.5 on two 70,000 block trades, this smells of serious collusion by MMs to manipulate the market. A criminal act in itself and something that ought to be brought to the attention of the OTC Board. Also, it is quite easy to do so. One MM offers a big block (say, 70,000 shares) and no takers, so he drops the price till there is a taker, which coincidentally happens to be a buddy, who will show his goodwill by taking it at 1.50. There is no risk involved because essentially they are selling to themselves. So why do this? Mainly to scare shareholders to liquidate when they still can get some money for it. This is scenario 1. The other scenario is manipulation by parties that WANT TO GET IN at the grounfloor. A collusive action as described above won't hurt and will likely help them pick up a lot of shares cheaply. This also is illegal and should be investigated as well. Anyhow, whatever it is. If it is all true, again, your shares aren't worth a dime so you may as well hold on to them. Just MHO Jan