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 : Zulu-tek, Inc. (ZULU) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: JAC who wrote (7277)	5/21/1998 10:52:00 AM
From: PartyTime	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 18444

I noticed a sale of 200 shares helped set the table for the downward motion. Now, there's a buy of 300 shares, which is helping to set the upward motion. There's a whole lot of tree shaking going on, and it's the market makers who've got their hands on the trunks. I suspect David Sirk, given his NYC connections, probably knows a couple of 'em. Hence, his confidence. If anyone's got the good technology, how about printing time, volume and purchase prices. Thanks.

To: JAC who wrote (7277)	5/21/1998 10:54:00 AM
From: David Sirk	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 18444

Your getting warm!

To: JAC who wrote (7277)	5/21/1998 11:31:00 AM
From: Jon Tara	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 18444

"Would and could ESVS watch ZULU drop so low" Notice that ESVS hasn't moved down in tandem. It's pretty obvious what's happening. I've mentioned this before, but nobody here sees it. Look at the stock swap between ESVS and ZULU. Don't you think that any future swap would be done under the same terms - same ratio? If so, either ZULU must go down or ESVS must go up. This is just arbitrage in action. You bought the wrong stock. (Actually, I don't think either stock was the "right" stock to buy - the correct action was to short NETZ, but we can't. I looked into shorting ESVS, and this is precisely why I didn't - it was the wrong one of the two to short.) Jeffrey, in particular, has some 'splainin to do, for trying to convince people that a more optimistic ratio would be used, without any basis. Considering his profession, he should know better. I don't know why you people have been blindly following the bandwagon here, assuming that the ratio will change before the merger, or that the combination will rise so much that it doesn't matter. There's a clear arbitrage here that has just been ignored. Why? Were cheerleaders sent here (by who?) to talk people up on buying the wrong stock? Why isn't there an active ESVS thread here?