SI
SI
discoversearch

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 : FAMH - FIRAMADA Staffing Services -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: Mark[ox5] who wrote (14640)5/1/1998 6:58:00 PM
From: Wayne J.  Respond to of 27968
 
Hello! Mark,

I think I may have been watching too many numbers this week, or I'm starting to see double postings!

I never realized that you had intended on leaving the thread so I didn't see the need to welcome you back! ( Just assumed you were one of the team!).......

Lonnie! The question of is the .1085 included in the current share trading price?--I read Brad's report, which was by the way, EXCELLENT!!!! as always!

I support Brad's observation's and if one considers how many times the integrity of the audited financials has been questioned by skeptics and naysayers that have strolled by this thread, as well as on other threads, there isn't the slightest chance that these current share price points are reflecting the .1085 or higher number!

It has been a long standing and back and forth bet as to whether the numbers are legitimate, do in fact exist, and would they ever be made available for public scruteny ( and since I am a shareholder of FAMH I will replace scruteny with enjoyment!).....

From the looks of things , we should know very soon if there is or isn't the financials containing .1085 or bettor!--Plus! We'll then know who wins the bet! ( All this of course just my own opinion!)

Best Regards,

Wayne J.




To: Mark[ox5] who wrote (14640)5/2/1998 11:07:00 AM
From: BCfan  Respond to of 27968
 
Mark,
When I posted that we should hold FAMH until the triple digits, I meant at least $x.xx , not $xxx.

HeHe

BCfan