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: Sriram Bala who wrote (7456)	5/26/1998 12:18:00 AM
From: PartyTime	Respond to of 18444

I strongly recommend that you hold onto your horses, Sriram. Give it at least till the end of May--it's not that far away. Regarding the response, I've read Donald Steinmann's answers before (I'm a member of Bobz). What I got was a pat answer, not a particular answer to my particular question. Those are frequent questions--the ones he noted--that he poses to investors who make inquiries. I've seen them before. I was disappointed he didn't tackle the conversion question. Remember, this guy answers a dozen or so questions each day, and he his pat answers. I wouldn't let his answer deter your investment. I mean it's easy to say "the fingers crossed were crossed behind my back." That's old hat. It's just as easy to say, "keep your fingers crossed," for good luck. Stay with the luck side of things, for just a short bit. Believe me, I don't want to be doing what I'm doing on this thread my whole life. There is productive change on the horizon. Again, hang onto your horses. Don't let 'em go just yet. Give 'em some water and oats and just be a bit more patient. I posted Steinmann's response earlier on the thread and there has been some discussion on it. You might want to review today's earlier SI postings. You might also make note of what the gentleman (see below) who posted on ESVS Yahool offers: NOTE: I suspect Ajammer is not an SI member, so I'm taking the liberty of pasting his ESVS Yahoo post. (Recommend folks go to Yahoo, hit message boards, then type in ESVS--quite a scene over there. Yeah, there's some yahoos, but there's also some good info.) <- Previous Next -> Message 932 of 935 Reply Zulu Partytime ajammer_1998 May 25 1998 6:53PM EDT You can't launder money in a limited partnership. There are potential tax advantages that accrue to the investors. The participants are closely screened by someone more fearfull than the SEC, that is USA's answer to the KGB, I'm talking about the IRS. Believe me private placements are closely screened, you wouldn't want to launder money there. The people who invest in them are looking for boom or bust investments through either dynamic profitibility or large tax losses. A mediocrity would only aggravate their tax situation. A lot of movies and large real estate deals are financed this way. This is how the independants brought the big studios to their knees. Believe me this is an investment for the wealthy, not the mafia, or any other shady types. If you had a listing of investors in private placements, it would read like "whose who" on blueblood row in America. Since the intent to take large tax losses should they accrue is a stated intention in the prospectus, you are in effect waving a red flag at the IRS saying please investigate me. This is why the Yacht Club thing resonates with me. As much as I srutinized this investment and pirated ideas from posts everywhere to glean even more information, I never noticed that this was a limited partnership. This renders any speculation about Hayton moot. If he were found complicit in any illegal activity that would create just cause for his removal, all Netvest would have to do is vote one of the other limited partners general partner and move on. It would not affect the day to day operations of ZULU at all. It wouldn't even cause a blip. Thats why they have their lawyers review these contracts. They are investing BIG bucks and want to make sure they make themselves as safe as possible from any liability above and beyond the large risk they are already taking. The general partner must also make known all the limited partners who will then get together at the inception of the partnership to discuss this very thing. Such as how to get together and vote on 24 hour notice in case they have to cover such a contingency. As I said these are not callow people. Hope this helps Ajammer