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 : ProNetLink...PNLK...Click here to enter -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: ztect who wrote (196)	5/24/1998 9:31:00 PM
From: Lucky Lady	Respond to of 40688

Thank you ztect for looking into insider trade restrictions. Your hard work is appreciated. Lucky Lady

To: ztect who wrote (196)	5/24/1998 11:00:00 PM
From: ztect	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 40688

Now finally, further recounting my conversation with Glenn Zagoren this past Friday, like I said previously we spoke on a number of issues raised in the WSJ article including the following: 1. Jean-Pierre Collardeau credentials. 2. The pricing of the original shares and options. 3. Paying for "Stock Genie's" services. 4. How PNLK is going to change the way trade is traditionally done Regarding paying for "Stock Genie's" services, Zagoren in his interview with the WSJ reporter Anders was actually surprised by Anders reaction to Zagoren paying for these services. The reason Zagoren was surprised was because of the un-stated hypocrisy that was implicit in Ander's questioning. Zagoren knows, from years of experience, that the only difference between PNL being covered by Stock Genie and many other stocks, products and people being covered in newspapers and magazines was a matter of forthrightness and not one of deception. Zagoren cited how he got certain products placed on the covers of magazines largely because of the advertising dollars contributed by these product's manufacturers to those magazines. In my opinion, Zagoren was more than just a bit naive by how such actions would be perceived on "the streets". I thought about this issue through a bit further on my own. For those who find fault with Zagoren's reasoning, I'd suggest they look at just about any computer magazine. Is it just a coincidence that recommended and featured products also have large paid for sections of advertisement. I also tried to obtain a copy of a magazine I use to receive which I think was called the "Small Company Investor". In this magazine mutual fund managers would recommend stocks. In the back of the magazine, the magazine included a disclaimer saying that all companies mentioned in the magazine had paid for coverage. Unfortunately, I couldn't find a current issue (or one of my back issues) of that magazine. I should also add that several of the stocks recommended , I purchased and made money on, and would not have otherwise heard of if they hadn't paid for their recognition in this aforementioned magazine. Now in my world paying for recognition sounds like MARKETING. Anyone who purchases an equity on the recommendation of the Stock Genie or any other such service or magazine has not done sufficient research especially when VERY obvious disclaimers are attached. Now continuing, since I couldn't find my former magazine, I looked for similar language in other periodicals. In the magazine, "Individual Investor" (www.lionline.com) included the following language on p.112 of its June, 1998 edition: "Certain wholly owned subsidiaries of Individual Investor Group, Inc. ("INDI"), which is the parent company of the publisher of Individual Investor, are engaged in investment management and consulting, including as a general partner of a domestic fund , investment manager of an offshore fund, and portfolio consultant to a sponsor of unit investment trusts. these funds and trusts may have positions(either short or long) in the securities of companies profiled or otherwise mentioned in this issue...." In the magazine, "The Opportunist" the language is even more explicit: "Information contained in articles on particular companies is not independently verified by The Opportunist, which receives a fee of $6,000 (in cash, stock, options or a combination of the three) per page from the featured company for publication in the magazine...The Opportunists, its principals, and employees may, from time to time, purchase, own or sell securities (including options) of the companies whose securities are discussed in The Opportunist...." Now the point to be derived from all the above information is not that PNL and Zagoren use of Stock Genie as a marketing tool was in anyway deceitful, the point of all the examples is that such leveraging and paying for exposure either directly, or indirectly, is more commonplace than even sources such as the WSJ wish to admit. Forward-looking statements in this release are made pursuant to the safe harbor provisions of the Private Securities Litigation Act of 1995. Investors are cautioned that such forward-looking statements involve risk and uncertainties, including, but not limited to, dependence on the PC and consumer electronics, and Internet technologies and on new services based on new technologies; reliability; competition and pricing pressures; and other risks