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 : Command Systems, Inc. (CMND) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Patrese who wrote (333)	4/29/1998 3:51:00 PM
From: JDN	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1956

Dear Patrese: Well, I used outstanding shares of around 4.9mm so that changes the values considerably but still seems relatively undervalued now at current prices. Of course if management is unable to execute that is a big negative. Wonder why they would insist on only expanding if NON y2k business? So long as they dont squander their cash horde I would think someone would come along and buy them out if they cant perform. JDN

To: Patrese who wrote (333)	4/29/1998 4:18:00 PM
From: Robert Floyd	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1956

>>Note: Actual shares outstanding for 2nd quarter is 7,656,000(Incl conversion of preferred to common).<< After the second quarter, are there any more preferred stock to be converted to common?

To: Patrese who wrote (333)	4/29/1998 5:01:00 PM
From: Robert Floyd	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1956

Cowen & Company and Volpe Brown Whelan & Company, LLC managed the offering. Aren't they suppose to do a valuation of the company before they release an IPO? How did they come up with the initial price for the offering? My point: they should have been aware of the points Steve Wilcox discussed in your recent post...they should not have been surprised. For the IPO, did they value the company primarily by presuming the future proposals would all come thru before now? If yes, since they were just proposals, placing so much weight on such a presumption would have been irresponsible. If not, on what did they base their growth rate assumptions and how did that change?

To: Patrese who wrote (333)	4/29/1998 7:48:00 PM
From: Superhawk	Respond to of 1956

Patrese, you wrote after speaking with CMND COO Wilcox: "Further expansion of offshore facility is contingent on receiving Non-Y2k projects. Now, all of facility is being used for Y2k." The reason I bought this company is precisely because of their Y2K work. I viewed them as an early-stage CBSL or SYNT. Y2K business is a cash cow. Huge margins, tax benefits in India, money in hand for future business diversifications and acquisitions. A proverbial land- office business for the next 20 months! Money hand over fist if management has a clue how to position and operate the company. Ah, but perhaps there's the rub. Management wants to move away from Y2K work. Further expansion in India, the COO said, is contingent on receipt of non-Y2K work. Excuse me? Was that just a gift horse whose teeth he didn't like? Somebody pleeeze hit this farmer with a brick. Take all the Y2K work you can get, Mr. Wilcox. Earn lots of money. Have a staff meeting tomorrow to discuss this concept.