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.

Gold/Mining/Energy : Crystallex (KRY) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: E. Charters who wrote (8648)	5/16/1998 1:06:00 PM
From: Martin E. Frankel	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 10836

Eric, I agree with all your comments regarding the Stockwatch report published by an unnamed author. However, Marc Oppenheimer and management is where I have my problem... and where you and I disagree. He (or they) don't have to grant interviews, but, IMO, they owe their stockholders (ie: their employers) an obligation to rapidly, if not immediately, respond to any untruths whether published or rumored. Until facts are known and published or until rumor becomes reality, the overtly and obviously biased reporting should be quashed... and not, again IMO, in a "subtle" fashion. I realize this was published by a Canadian media company, however they disseminated it into the U.S. via the internet to my E-Mail. The first amendment of the U.S. Constitution allows for freedom of speech... particularly when it pertains to the media, however, and it is a big "however", it does not allow the media the right to malicious "distortion" of the truth, ie: taking things out of context, partial quoting of individuals, misstatements of facts, et cetera ad nauseum, when they know such acts will cause significant harm not only to the Company, but to individual stockholders. Without a clear and immediate statement or clarification on point by the KRY management there is no manner in which action (by the Company or a class action by stockholders) against Stockwatch can be taken. It is also necessary to mitigate damages, not only for the Conpany's sake, but legally. Unfortunately, Eric, as far as the public is concerned, until the facts are known and a decision from the SC forthcoming, it is perception that counts... not reality. I suggest that if Marc Oppenheimer talks to you that you strongly suggest to him that an immediate and firm response is mandatory. I certainly wouldn't want to see a stockholders' class action suit started against KRY because they failed to take prompt action. As I previously stated... in this instance silence is definitely not golden!! Best regards, Marty