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 : FNet=Internatl Voice/Fax/Data&Video Services ViaInternet -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Stephen B. Temple who wrote (232)	5/11/1998 9:54:00 AM
From: Bruce Hoyt	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 609

Temp, you said, "There won't be a setback on the IPO of FNet", in response to George's comment on FNet needing to demonstrate its revenue generating capability. I have been thinking along the same lines as George on this and am curious what gives you the confidence that we won't have another IPO delay. Its already about a year past initial projections and based on Tom's comments at the SHM I was then assuming a September 1998 worst case scenerio. More recent speculation based on rumored underwriter's feedback has been that now early 1999 is more likely, unless they have found a more open-minded underwriter. My confidence in Frank and his new team is very high but with 60k shares of this puppy I am naturally REAL interested in any and all developments, clues or logic I have missed. Thanks, Bruce

To: Stephen B. Temple who wrote (232)	5/11/1998 11:00:00 AM
From: vic klimpl	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 609

expectations,expectations and time. Since I have been following this stock the most consistant thing I have noticed is that most investors expect things to happen much quicker than the ability of any company to deliver.Let me sight the notion of the ipo.When I initially invested in fnet in the spring of 97 the board was abuzz with the notion of a may/june ipo.I responded that this was ridiculous and nonsense.I the proported bull of ftel was speaking negatively. I reported that a close relative spent almost five years trying to ipo a company.To remind people we had to first get s1 fully reporting status on ftel first, develop a dvg with full network supervisory capability first. So here is the real skinny- We have fully reporting status We are weeks away from an initial rollout of the network with operating dvgs We need the following scenario to ipo Big investment within the next month or so to go from 12 pops to at least 100 pops pre ipo(IMHO)with large rev. generation(remember 500 pops is eventual goal) Then ipo.From my take the longer we wait to ipo and build up the network and revenue the higher the price of the ipo and less dilution of ftel ownership in fnet.This scenario will give me a time estimate of 1q 99.However there are other scenarios that could bring it forward into 3 or4 q 98 which to my way of thinking would be less favorable.And oh yes before an underwriter forks over 100-150mil bucks they would like to see a mini working network. only seems reasonable.

To: Stephen B. Temple who wrote (232)	5/11/1998 11:05:00 AM
From: vic klimpl	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 609

I have a different take. I firmly believe we are technologically ahead and with the demands from the beta tests we are pulling further ahead,period.Maybe we selected the wrong customers and applications for initial stuff because of its complexity but it is a good news bad news scenario.It delayed initial orders but caused us to produce a very feature rich leading product.Think about this,I am happy its proven so difficult to do. If not any one could easily enter it seems that the barriers technically may be a bit more difficult and that benefits us.

To: Stephen B. Temple who wrote (232)	5/11/1998 12:50:00 PM
From: vic klimpl	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 609

talk about missing windows-aol On sunday I recieved a free comp disk for 50 hours of aol, I said what the heck give it a try.So after some pain and anguish I got up and running or should I say limping.After making sure I had the right setting 56k hayes modem I got on at 14.4k.Havent been that slow in a few years.Tried 2 different nos. once I got all the way to 28.8 big whoop.Then when I went in it took three hours to load the browser.Guess what after 3 hrs. it didnt work. Went back in to use there aol browser and it kept kicking me off.So, after this modern marvel I decided to call them up.Guess what,the recording said all lines were busy for customer service and to call back later. How in the world is this co. 100 bucks with millions of subscribers. After the bashing fnet took with alice not retuning a call for a day ya de ya de ya give me a break. If aol was subject to the bashing scrutiny of the ftel s i thread it would be a buck not 100 bucks.The service sucks. I have been on fnet for over a year. I regularly coneect at 38-44k and cant remember the last time it went down during a session.