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 : Zulu-tek, Inc. (ZULU) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: jerimiah who wrote (4762)	3/25/1998 1:12:00 PM
From: Jon Tara	Respond to of 18444

Whom were you referring-to as a "disgruntled employee"? The person who filed the lawsuit is Robert Colvin. The ex-SIM employee who works for Wired is David Karnstedt. There is no indication that David Karnstedt is disgruntled, nor that he had anything to do with the story. Colvin, clearly, is disgruntled. But he did not get a job with Wired.

To: jerimiah who wrote (4762)	3/25/1998 1:51:00 PM
From: tonto	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 18444

jeremiah, what job did Colvin receive? Does anyone know any of these players very well? There are accusations going back and forth regarding individuals none of us know. The allegations are serious because if true provides us with a story with problems that cannot be ignored forever. It is in the investors of this stock to not to dismiss the negative information immediately, nor affirm it, but instead to start to make calls and learn more about it. _____________________________________________________________________ Colvin's suit raises the profile of Hayton, a dealmaker with a long history of scrapes with securities regulators and business partners, in the Zulu-Tek picture. Butler, the attorney, describes Hayton as an adviser to a group of investors who hold the majority of Zulu-Tek's stock. But Colvin's suit asserts that Hayton controls Zulu-Tek as its majority shareholder and acts as a "de facto Chief Financial Officer, Chairman of the Board and President" of Softbank Interactive. It was in this capacity that Hayton allegedly withheld the money owed Colvin and forced him out of his job. Five days later in a face-to-face meeting, Colvin again asked Hayton how he could refuse to hand over the $200,000 given the signed agreement from Meatchem, the wire transfer signed by Hayton. That's when, according to the suit, "Mr. Hayton laughed and said, 'I always negotiate to gain leverage' and 'no one said we had to be fair.'" With the supposed extended relationship that Hayton has with the company, why did he allegedly take part in this face-to-face meeting? Subsequent correspondence with Meatchem in which Colvin asserted he did not agree to resign and demanded his payment, was met by a letter from Meatchem in which he agreed that Colvin was owed $200,000, but said that only Hayton had the authority to transfer the money. Meatchem contended that despite serving as the parent company's chairman and CEO, he had no signing power over Softbank Interactive's bank accounts. Who besides Hayton has authority over bank accounts? On 16 February, Colvin contacted an attorney representing Softbank Interactive and was told that the company was experiencing a cash shortage. "If that is true," the suit states, "it can only be because Defendants caused the Yahoo options to be liquidated in violation of their duty to hold those options in trust ..." Is a copy available of the letter from Meatchem? It may be an excellent starting point.