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.

Technology Stocks : THREE FIVE SYSTEM (TFS) - up from here? -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: raefon who wrote (1207)	4/2/1998 10:56:00 PM
From: dfloydr	Respond to of 3247

Good point raefeon! We must be careful to characterize our gripes as constructive criticism. There are some solid and valid criticisms to be made but I would not want the lurkers to think, from our comments, that this company is a basket case - which it is not. We can well have some disagreements "in the family" ranging from Monday morning quarterbacking to reasoned suggestions for improvement Who knows, we may even bring on some changes .... but we are still shareholders because we recognize that the company made it through a very tough 1996, is making progress, is making money, is doing research which is paid for out of earnings (not by eating up the seedcorn) and is growing. If they ever stop acting as though they are working on CIA secrets, we should someday see some a substantial increase in the value of our holdings. If I did not feel that way, I'd have sold and been gone some time ago ... though at these volumes and prices that would take a few days and give me a lifetime supply of loss carry forwards ;-) My wish is that I had waited until now to buy into TFS! Floyd Russell

To: raefon who wrote (1207)	4/2/1998 11:00:00 PM
From: Noblesse Oblige	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 3247

Hi Raefon, I thought that I had made it perfectly clear that I was going to be around for the duration. I am afraid that for Mr. Buchanan, the only way to rid himself of this "oversight" is to get the stock to an appropriate value, one that reflects the real worth of the business. If he can do that, I have so many other companies that are easier to follow, that I will be out of this one quietly and on "little cat feet." Then, it will be up to one of the rest of you to "keep 'em honest." ;-) Unfortunately for me...and for him...the history of the last five years suggests that he may not know how to do this. I know. But, nothing that I suggest appears to be of interest to him. Perhaps in my next life. <Guffaws> On the matter of Mr. Lang and the other large holder you mentioned, I hadn't noticed the year to year change in the holdings. Obviously, if they went from owning over five percent of the company's stock to a lesser number...without filing appropriate Williams Act filings (13D's), the S.E.C. would be most interested in the disparity. Perhaps they might consider if a filing was necessary...and assuming it was, make it late (because it is better late than never)...before some overzealous "thread" reader contacts the S.E.C. to make an inquiry. One can only wonder what TFS feels about this, as it had named at least one of the two gentlemen as five percent holders in its proxy. For the company to remove a name, it would have to be aware that the ownership position had changed, and I would assume (though of course I am not a trained attorney) that it would have been responsible to determine what precisely had happened to any required filing. It appears to me that it would have been appropriate for the company to make an inquiry before it printed the latest shareholder documents. So Raefon, what do you think?

To: raefon who wrote (1207)	4/2/1998 11:11:00 PM
From: Noblesse Oblige	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 3247

Hi Raefon... You know, I had an interesting idea immediately following my last post. As I do not have the appropriate proxy materials here, would you be kind enough to check for exact numbers of shares and dates from former TFS proxies for the purpose of determining during what year the two parties you have mentioned actually made their sales? I remember that some time ago...early 1996 I think...that a very large block of TFS changed hands on an approximately two dollar downtick a few days before some unpleasant news was disseminated. I think it would be "interesting" to note whether trades done during that year would have required S.E.C. William's Act filings. I have always thought it "strange" that the seller of those shares had such perspicacity and shrewdness to make the sale on such a timely basis. His fortunate timing saved him a considerable amount of money, as the stock cratered afterwards, finally coming to rest for a time in the 8's. Although I may be sending you on a "wild goose chase," I think it would be of some interest to make the comparison, don't you? Why don't we see where this goes?