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: Hawkmoon who wrote (44473)	3/30/1998 11:25:00 AM
From: bmart	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 55532

Mr. Reece, I read your post with much amusement. Your suggestions to Pugs are quite humourous, particularly because they come from you. I believe the investor is contractually bound to RMCW, not RMIL. Furthermore, it was explained to me that the investor has missed the deadline for the $10MM. He has had difficulty getting the money through the proper channels. RMIL, from my understanding, extended the deadlines due to these circumstances and the investors letter of intent. To demand a "public" statement from RMIL, when they are accomodating RMCW by extending the deadline, is not only humorous, it is potentially dangerous. I believe you and the Tideglider are provocating this kind of danger. The Tideglider even suggested Pugs post the letter of intent, assuming Pugs has a copy of such letter. Also, I find it very revealing Tonto will not respond to Pugs direct questions regarding Zapara & Mork. It appears Tonto wasn't as interested in dialogue as he would have the board believe. It seems it would have been quite simple to respond to Pugs and call Pugs bluff. I am also perplexed as to why Tonto avoids this subject when it appears to be central to this story. In conclusion, I would think your constant demands for shareholders to demand a "public statement" from RMIL, after they submitted a 8K, when the investor is contractually bound with RMCW, not RMIL, persists only to compromise the advent of trading and provoke more SEC woes. Good day RB