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 : Corporate Vision (CVIA) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: K A Anderson who wrote (3881)	4/18/1998 9:33:00 AM
From: Popiye	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 6654

KAA - If you have an opportunity, please read the bestseller paperback book, "The Digital Economy" which explains the information age. IMHO you are very close to the story (#3881); also anticipate they are perishable - WODT may over-react in their stupor, and walkaway from the table.

To: K A Anderson who wrote (3881)	4/18/1998 4:30:00 PM
From: John Sahakian	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 6654

Please forgive, LONG-WINDED post. KAA, I am trying to map out the responses/solutions WOTD can offer to fix or mend this situation. Most of the ones you mentioned in your post from a couple of days back (after you spoke to Jack) involve shareholders pumping more money into WOTD/CVIA either now or in the future. While I think this might seem like a positive offer to WOTD management, I highly doubt it will do wonders for their share price or even make the shareholders happy. The real problem is the 300-1 reverse split. They have to accept that either way they go it's going to take them time to get the NASDAQ listing. If they go ahead with the reverse split as planned, the current share price will go below the $.01 mark. I can almost guarantee that immediately after the split, the price will start sinking again. A bad scenario IMO. It will be an uphill battle all the way to the listing, as many shareholders will be unhappy. On the other hand, I don't know if they're willing to reduce the ratio and voluntarily take a more gradual approach to getting the NASDAQ listing. Who knows what their marketing strategy is regarding future mergers, and what role having a NASDAQ listed stock will play in that. On the one hand, I know if I were a business owner, I would be hesitant (putting it lightly) to swap my life-long business for a few bucks and a huge chunk of a BB penny stock. But with a 300 to 1 ratio, the shareholder is getting screwed because management is impatient and cannot wait a little longer to move to NASDAQ. If they really have all these mergers lined up, the price will get to where they want naturally and on its own. I wonder if they would be willing to make the ratio 50 or 100 to 1. Might not be as quick, but at least they'll be out of the pennies and we won't be getting screwed as bad. Another option, though possibly unrealistic, would be to reduce the authorized from 50 million to 5 million. Some on this board have said 500,000, but even in my opinion that's too small for comfort. 5 million is enough to get started and have some left over. This type of announcement would be sure to get the share price back up to the $.02-$.03 range, and increase shareholder confidence. Yes, it might be more of a headache to get authorization, etc. to release more shares, but at least the shareholders won't feel so violated and we can all move forward together. Either way, they aren't going to get their NASDAQ listing as soon as they thought. IMO, they should try to focus on the fundamentals and rebuild shareholder confidence. They failed to treat/acknowledge CVIA shareholders as WOTD shareholders. A very big, yet correctable mistake. They should do right by us, and we should get this show on the road together. I know it's pure speculation, but what are the options available to them? There are a lot of smart people on this board. We should be able to figure it out. Further more, if WOTD management/CVIA management reads SI, we should use this forum and tell them exactly what we want. Let's spell it out for them as best we can. Opinions? Comments? John