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 : SYQUEST -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Michael Coley who wrote (6302)	4/29/1998 6:22:00 PM
From: Gary Wisdom	Respond to of 7685

Michael, on further thought, you are right. The individual investor owns probably less than 1% of this company. Management owns less than .25%. The venture capitalists getting all the free shares and warrants, only to turn around and sell them to retail investors who think a $3 stock is a bargain, will definitely vote for it. After all, they own 80% of this company (or more). I've heard recently that if you buy a Sparq drive, and return it to the store from where you purchased it, they will no longer give you your money back. They give you Syquest stock instead. This stock personifies the greed and lack of research in the market today. In 5 years, Syquest stock has lost 82% of the market price (from the Syquest 14A). Guess some people won't sell until they lose 100%. BTW, although Iomega isn't the greatest investment these days, it is still up many times its price 5 years ago. So, please, no comparisons to Iomega. There is no comparison. P.S. I am neither long nor short either Iomega or Syquest.

To: Michael Coley who wrote (6302)	4/29/1998 6:25:00 PM
From: Rocky Reid	Respond to of 7685

>>SYQT is treating them quite well, and they would benefit from extending this hopeless situation as long as possible.<< I agree. SyQuest only has a paltry 94,000,000(?) shares outstanding or so, and 170,000,000(?) authorized. Iomega has over 262,000,000 shares outstanding with 400,000,000 authorized. SyQuest has a ways to go before it is in real trouble, and has to issue a proxy to authorize more shares to dilute. What a brilliant scheme by a bunch of already rich guys to make even more money And, a result of all this is this eats into Iomega's earnings as well!

To: Michael Coley who wrote (6302)	4/29/1998 7:17:00 PM
From: Richard James	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 7685

Michael, I disagree that the venture capitalists will automatically vote to authorize the last issuance of preferred shares and warrants. That is, if the recipients of those shares aren't the same venture capitalists. I would think they would wish to avoid dilution of their shares. Richard James

To: Michael Coley who wrote (6302)	4/29/1998 7:47:00 PM
From: FuzzFace	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 7685

Looks like SYQT may have a "death spiral" convertible in Series 3.. In April 1998, the Company raised approximately $11,700,000 in a transaction with Fletcher whereby Fletcher exercised a warrant to acquire 5,000,000 shares of the Company's common stock. As an incentive for exercising that warrant, Fletcher acquired at par value an additional 1,696,429 shares of the Company's common stock. The warrant exercised was acquired in connection with the purchase of the Series 3 Preferred Stock. Fletcher was also granted the right to acquire additional shares of the Company's common stock at par value. The exact number of the additional shares that could be issued is unknown as it will vary depending on the future price of the Company's common stock. And here it looks like they thought they could dilute all they wanted without shareholder approval. But NASD is making them get approval.. The Company has recently been notified by the NNM that given the structure of Financing Transactions relating to the sale of the Series 3, Series 4, Series 5 and Series 7 Preferred Stock, stockholder approval would be necessary to exceed the 20% Limitation. Previously, the Company had been notified that transactions so structured would not be deemed to be at less than market value, and therefore would not require stockholder approval to issue shares in excess of the 20% Limitation. That explains the following kind of shenanigans: In December 1997, the Company raised approximately $6,000,000 in a transaction with CC Investments, LDC ("CCI"), whereby CCI exercised warrants to acquire 2,000,000 shares of the Company's common stock. As an incentive for exercising those warrants, CCI received a warrant to acquire 1,500,000 shares of the Company's common stock. CCI is one of the investors in the Series 4 Preferred Stock, the Series 5 Preferred Stock and the Series 7 Preferred Stock (defined below). The warrants exercised by CCI were acquired in connection with the purchase of the Series 4 Preferred Stock. Instead of just issuing more common at 3/shr, they thought they could come in under radar by giving away more warrants as an inducement to get someone to exercise existing warrants at 3. Wonder how long before those were flipped? Why is this scam allowed to go on? Does the use of the word "turnaround" cause the SEC look the other way?