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 : Forecross Corporation : Y/2000 -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Rick Voteau who wrote (938)	4/27/1998 11:23:00 AM
From: Juraj (Yuri) Krajci	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 1654

Thank you for the informative post on the Y2K situation. When it comes to Forecross, however, you seem have mentioned only that they are experienced and positioned. Omitted from your analysis is that they've failed to meet their financial projections, do not appear to have a fiscally prudent management team (witness the executive salaries), have no working capital and are technically insolvent. I must therefore disagree that the downside potential is minimal; it would seem that the downside is 100% if the creditors decide to pull the plug. JK

To: Rick Voteau who wrote (938)	4/27/1998 11:24:00 PM
From: Ruyi	Read Replies (4) \| Respond to of 1654

Hello Rick. I'm a long-time Forecross investor living in the Vancouver, British Columbia area. I am very well informed regarding the Vancouver Stock Exchange rules and regulations. I too am fed up with David Stern (whomever he may be). Here are a few insights to add to your recently published "technical brief" on Forecross...which was very well done and with which I am in full agreement. FACT: All US stocks in Canada have a ".u" after their symbol (ie: frx.u) if they trade in US dollars. This has nothing to do with a company's finances. FACT: Vancouver Sun newspaper writer David Baines doesn't appear to like Vancouver stocks and apparently thinks Y2K is not a significant problem. He's also lacking in technical knowledge of computers or the high tech industry. He personally has told me as much in telephone conversations I have had with him. FACT: Vancouver short sellers that I know have told me they've used David Baines as a pipe line of disinformation. Interesting that articles published May 1997 & April 1998 were published the day before the Vancouver short positions were released. Information in both articles were taken totally out of context and as well, unfortunately, Vancouver Stock Exchange rules do not allow a company to state they are seeking a listing on other exchanges. FACT: Sunday's Vancouver Sun (April 26) contains an article stating the VSE does not understand high tech stocks and the financing that goes along with them but will be making an attempt to list more high tech companies in the future. FACT: All public offerings, SEC or otherwise, must state worse-case scenerios and down play any positives in their offering memorandums. In British Columbia you must actually state the company you are trying to raise financing for may, in all probability, fail. The recent Baines article (April 21) was compiled using information contained in Forecross's SEC application - not breaking news. The auditors reports were actually tabled last June and were public knowledge at that time. FACT: Two Vancouver houses apparently covered short positions by crossing stock the morning of April 21st (morning of article). They are the same two houses that opened the stock low that morning. FACT: Auditors reports re: Forecross were modified to reflect wording required by disclosure rules and only after Forecross decided to go seek an SEC listing. Look up any high tech company undergoing expansion and you will see greater expenses than revenues. This does not mean bankruptcy, this means growth. FACT: Forecross is currently in a "quiet period" and because they cannot issue statements during this period they are vulnerable to lies, half-truths and bad press with no means to respond. FACT: Forecross people sold no stock in 1997/98. Vancouver Sun writer Baines also confirmed this in his articles appearing to contradict himself: in one sentence he says the company appears not to be viable, but in the next he states they have a good following and can't understand why they're not selling more of the issued stock to raise funds. Generally you don't sell when you think prices are going up. I guess the insiders know something Baines doesn't. FACT: The price on options was lowered to reward employees with a bigger up side, not to raise funds internally. FACT: Retired EDS executives bought franchises in Forecross for millions of dollars. These folks are no dummies. FACT: EDS has a working partnership agreement with Forecross. FACT: Y2K work is just now getting going. Bank mergers are being attributed to the high dollar cost of becoming Y2K compliant. FACT: Y2K work is projected to go long into the next century (2010-2020) re: Ed Yaradini's opinions. Today's Globe & Mail (April 27) article quotes him as well. FACT: Euro dollar conversions are projected to be an even bigger expense than the Y2K problem. IBM France - Forecross partnershipping agreement...hum?! Work on this problem will go past the year 2002. FACT: EDS and Keanne getting huge Fortune 500 contracts. Factory based solutions ala Forecross seen as the only viable option given shrinking time frames. FACT: Most companies don't want contracts announced as they are worried about their own stock prices when the magnitude of costs are disclosed. FACT: Keanne has rules that any partnershipping team must complete 3 contracts before any announcements can be made. If contracts ongoing, no announcements can be made. FACT: Forecross leased additional factory space last month with leases running past the year 2000. FACT: Forecross is actively hiring employees for Washington DC area as well as other areas. FACT: Vancouver is a short seller's wet dream at present! Mining stocks are in the dumpster, volumes are low and in my opinion the practices of the floor traders are questionable (as is their integrity). FACT: Upon examination of Vancouver houses, Vancouver short sellers are actually long Forecross but are making money in the short term while the company awaits their US listing. Several Vancouver houses have recently been audited and found to be selling stock they did not own and had to go into the market, buy it immediately and pay cash...usually at a dollar or more premium. FACT: Somebody is running large amounts of code through Forecross's factory...look at the number of new employees and expansion of their factory in the past 3 to 6 months. FACT: Always the same 3 Vancouver houses selling short and playing with the opening price in the morning with a measly 100 - 200 shares to get the price dropped. Big Canadian and US institutions are buying and way long. FACT: I don't like Pat Ditmar, but I've invested in Forecross technology...not Pat Ditmar's personality. FOOD FOR THOUGHT: If Forecross is not viable: 1. why is the company expanding? 2. why did Pat Jones leave AMEX for Forecross? 3. why apply to SEC for US listing and open themselves up to full disclosure, 3 year audits and all the expenses that are involved in such an application? 4. why are insiders not selling their own personal stock and the company not offering stock it has authorization to sell? 5. why are they not humping their stock with the Vancouver brokers? 6. why, if they just want a stock story, not stay on Vancouver and get the price jacked up to the moon? (Forecross wants off of Vancouver.) THE RUMOR: The word up here is Forecross just turned down an offer to purchase all outstanding company stock in the $40.00 range. Has anybody else heard this? Regards. Doug