SI
SI
discoversearch

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 : Corporate Vision (CVIA) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: RockChalk who wrote (5183)5/26/1998 7:00:00 PM
From: K A Anderson  Read Replies (2) | Respond to of 6654
 
Thank you for clearing that up, yes you are right I take full responsibility for both the Reg S issues, the 300 to 1 reverse split the dramatic price decline all the other allegations you post. Of course Jack and WOTD doesnt have anything to do with this, Its all my
fault right?

I would like for you to post where I called Wayne a co-conspirator, cmon I bet you cant because I didnt.

I didnt realize I had a following, but you are welcome to them I guess with your qualifications it shouldnt be all that hard for you.

If CVIA was worthless how did they raise $1,500,000 in Reg S funds? CVIA shell had a price and you know it.

Sounds to me like WOTD has arrived on the thread. When you get finished with your ranting go check some of Patricks companies out, and show me the money they made. You cant because they havent.

KAA



To: RockChalk who wrote (5183)5/26/1998 7:23:00 PM
From: Milk  Respond to of 6654
 
C'mon guys, take it easy. Everyone is pretty stressed out here<g>.
Even though KAA and I disagree on a couple of issues, we still get along. The recent price action is depressing enough, so let's try to keep it civil.

Welcome to the thread!

Milk



To: RockChalk who wrote (5183)5/26/1998 7:29:00 PM
From: campe  Respond to of 6654
 
Hi Jay, welcome to SI

Wayne did not divest because of KAA or anyone on this thread and he still lurks. In fact, I'm sure he'll reply to you post. Wayne, like many of us, have felt deceived by the information coming out of CVIA. He was never driven off this thread by anyone.

Its difficult when different folks call and get different info from Jack (and Keith). Milk did a great job documenting many of the calls folks made to Jack. Try aligning the dates of these calls with the press releases regarding the Reg S. As Jack was saying it was a "last resort" on the phone, he was signing the Reg S agreement.

pages.cthome.net

Many folks, trying to contribute and share their DD, were made to look stupid when the course of events described by Jack never transpired.

Milk was not abused by KAA for sharing a phone conversation he had with Jack. In fact, here's KAA's response to Milk.

Message 4595739

KAA is trying to preserve what's left of his investment. Like many of us, its being diluted with every passing week. For a worthless shell, it was funny how Jack could raise $1.5MM easier than he could reverse merge...<g>

As a M&A professional, how much time does it realistically take for a reverse merger into a clean shell? It took BA less time to acquire MD! Wouldn't it have been better to reverse merge, acquire one business, show some earnings, file some SEC reports and THEN do a Reverse Split? Of course as an M&A professional, you would always have the companies long term value foremost in your mind.

Anyways, welcome aboard and looking forward to your continued contributions.

GJC

BTW - Have you ever spoken to Jack (as a CVIA shareholder)? How about adding something (even a few lies) to your profile so we don't think you are, or work for Pat Charles and WOTD.



To: RockChalk who wrote (5183)5/26/1998 7:37:00 PM
From: pureblood  Respond to of 6654
 
read the thread, get real.



To: RockChalk who wrote (5183)5/26/1998 7:41:00 PM
From: pureblood  Respond to of 6654
 
figures you've been lurking.....give us some news ??????got any????

didn't think so....go lurk somewhere else.



To: RockChalk who wrote (5183)5/26/1998 7:50:00 PM
From: Novice Bob  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 6654
 
Jay:

I certainly appreciate your opinion, and that is what you have posted here is your opinion, even laced with a little emotion, but that is OK.

First off, you are greatly mistaken stating an empty shell has no value, even more so a shell with with a tax loss to pass along and $500,000 in the Bank. Please post some research or a valid arguement this shell has no value, shells retuinely sell for the value of being an all in place public company activily trading. You can go to another company that will do the work to get your company to this point and spend $250,000 to $750,000 plus and maybe you would be looking at a time frame of 6 months to a year. Therefore, this shell has real and tangable value. Question, what value does WOTD have?

Mr. Anderson and I have always been respectful of Wayne, Milk or any other shareholder with any opinion, our concern is to our investment (of which you eluide to it as more of a gamble).

When something is wrong with a stock, when my or Mr. Anderson's DD or anyone else detects possible problems, should they merely stop posting? Should they not reveal their concerns?

Shareholders are the owners of a company, they have certain rights, this does not include the right to be sold down the river. This is an investment no a gamble, at least it is supose to be an investment. If you invest, you research. If the company is doing a Reg S you research Reg S, if the company is merging, you research the company and people they are merging with, if the company is doing a reverse split, you research reverse splits.

Guess what we have been doing????

Grow Up..., I am 39 years old and work in an investment company (3 other people) that owns and operates over $15,000,000 worth of commercial real estate, I assemble financial analysis models, lease, broker, manage, assemble financial statements, draft agreements, evict, sue for commissions (when necessary), and cordinate renovations of our properties. I am very capable of understanding how business works (or is suppose to work).

BTW, KAA runs his own successful company as well.

Lawyers can't do anything

Lawyers are not all created equal, some do fall short of meeting their expected performance, you fire him/her and get another one.

Wayne and Milk are respected here, their opinions are respected. I personnally felt a great loss when Wayne announced he had sold his position. All he wanted was a minimual news release, a few answers from someone he defended over and over.

We, the doubters, have valid concerns we want addressed, we clearly stated we wanted answers. We backed off, we gave CVIA time to come forward, CVIA came forward with a 1 for 300 reverse and another Reg S. People should read the off shore link I posted as well as the SEC enforcement action.

I am protecting my investment, I could go on and on, but I have researched and researched this deal and the way it is going together. It is abusive to the shareholders of the common stock (IMO), and there are well over 100 shareholders of the same opinion.

I respect your opinion and your post, it is your right. Please respect my time and opinion as well.

Robert



To: RockChalk who wrote (5183)5/26/1998 8:02:00 PM
From: Playin my Cards  Respond to of 6654
 
RockChalk,

Here is my perspective...

You put this BS that he is in Jamaica or wherever with your money. What MONEY!?!?!
I think he is referring to the Reg S money...ie $1.5 Million. Not sure whether Jack took a vacation but there should be a LOT of cash in CVIA's bank account (Until WOTD gets a hold of it anyways)

Think about what he has said, it has all come true.
I presume you are referring to Jack here. Well the only thing out of CVIA officially via PRs has been a bunch of status reports that really don't say much except

...is nearly complete...

...is almost complete...

...announced progress...

So I guess he has done everything he said, He has COMPLETED ABSOLUTELY nothing except drive the price down 75%, diluted the shareholders equity 50%, executed a damaging reverse split, got CVIA involved with a guy that only has a history of issuing Reg S's, reverse splits, and driving companie's stock into the shitter.

Enough ranting and raving. I said my piece.



To: RockChalk who wrote (5183)5/26/1998 10:18:00 PM
From: paulbk  Respond to of 6654
 
Rock Chalk,
The real sad part is that people believed Arnold. He has said this
was a reporting company,then it was reveled they did not have the proper reporting setup in place. Of the reports that have been filed,
one was absurdly late, both were ridiculously truncated and devoid of
the kind of info usually found in such reports. He has also stated at
least twice various price levels where he thought shareholders would
"be okay". One was .04 the other .02. All this for what? What have these guys been doing all this time? Who needs to buy WOTD? It has no
assets, it does nothing, it has no earnings, being associated with it
leaves one with a sort of stench that would shame a skunk. Who needs
it? It's worth nothing.
Arnold has taken money from a lot of good people for no reason.
He's issued one carrot on a stick news release after another then used
the enthusiasm of people like Wayne to keep the price propped up.
If you believe in poor beleaguered Jack so much let's see you pony up
4875.00 for 1000 shares first thing in the morning. Better yet, start
your own rally with a 10k block purchase for 48750.00.



To: RockChalk who wrote (5183)5/26/1998 10:36:00 PM
From: Wayne J.  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 6654
 
Hello! Jay,

After reading your initial posting let me address my feelings/reactions to it in the following way.

#1. I appreciate the confidence that you expressed in my previous efforts to help support the CVIA thread early on in the CVIA Saga.
( Although I am not attempting to speak on their behalf but I also feel the same towards Milk and DLee !)...

#2. I also have a high regard for KAA, Novice Bob and GJC who for a significant period of time in my opinion played a very supportive role in the CVIA efforts! ( In my own opinion!)

#3. To the best of my knowledge I am not aware that KAA has ever called me names or a conspirator--in fact all three of the above stated gentlemen in #2. have always been very cordial, civil, and when I was more active on this thread we communicated more frequently
hopefully to bettor understand the challenges that CVIA faced and to see what ( if anything we could do to help)...

#4. I do not want it to appear like I am back tracking, but during some of the more heated discussions on this thread I recall that possibly a few individuals attempted to try and take their frustrations out on me with a couple of verbal inuendo's---and with all the hundreds of postings that have been contributed it may be that it was possible to make a possible mix-up as to who said what to whom!--I do recall that KAA and others sent me e-mail support telling me they had a high regard for my efforts and were not pointing the finger at a fellow thread member!

#5. My own personal style is to do what I feel is right for me to support my investments!--Of course dependent on the situation various types of action/follow-up can be contemplated!--SO! That could sometimes mean more or less energy in support of an investment! Plus! I try to see what the end result might be down the road! Taking into consideration, myself, other fellow shareholders, Company Management,
and where do I see the company being down the road---and a part of this that will vary from person to person----how do I want to feel when the dust seetles and all has been said and done?

#6. Over the several months that this thread was following the CVIA Saga--I now know I invested way too much of my time and got much more emotionally involved then I should have!-It was as though I was on some type of a Crusade!---It took up way too much of my time, and quite frankly took me away from focusing on other business opportunites!--But! Along the way I met some very interesting people, and learned a few things! ( Whether I was planning to or not!)....

#7. When I sensed that the news releases were not containing the information that I gave myself a deadline of receiving then it was decision making time!----It wasn't a matter if I thought that CVIA was going to be a successful entity down the road---the question that I asked myself was I prepared financially and emotionally to continue
being a CVIA Shareholder?

#8. Quite frankly my ability to make a decision was a much easier one to make when I came to grips with the following considerations!

---- I felt all along that there had to be a reasonable expectation from the shareholders that some sort of compensation program would be presented at some point in time to ease the anxiety that was felt by many from the 300 to 1 Share Consolidation announcement in mid-April, 1998...( Do I think the timing of the share consolidation announcement was shareholder friendly? Of course not! Was it necessary in the long range growth of the company? I'm not an expert in that field but personally I would have preferred a lower ratio---- Now in retrospect, I think that even Jack would agree that in conjunction with the share roll back announcement should have included some details that would have made the rollback a little more user friendly! i.e Compensation Program, acquisition details, etc...( Just my own opinion!).....

-------Once I personally felt in my opinion that CVIA was considering a compensation program--I felt that regardless of my decision I would most likely be a shareholder in CVIA down the road--if, as and when a Shareholder compensation program came into affect!
----So! As I expressed on previous postings when new news did not materialyze within the time frames that I set for myself, I divested of my CVIA Share Holdings!-Anticipating/Hoping that some day in the future that maybe I would still have some further value in my CVIA Investment via some form of Compensation program!-------

The other factor that was a consideration in divesting of my investment was I felt that some shareholder sentiment was building into taking legal action against CVIA!----

-----Now! I am not judging anyone's decision here, other then to say
from my own point of view my previous experiences with legal followup in matters such as was indicated by some on this thread--turned out for me to be financially costly, very stressful, and something I had told myself I would not be involved in again!----

------Also the other challenge that I had to come to grips with was I prepared to go after Jack at all costs?--The answer for me is NO!--Once again not intended to approve or disapprove of anyone else's efforts or intentions!----I still feel Jack was put in a difficult situation-and I admire his efforts to face the onslaught of phone calls that he did on a regular basis! In my opinion that took much committment and character!-----

Even though I am not currently a shareholder -I still feel that Jack believes that he is working in the best interests of the CVIA Shareholders for the long term!---I realize that I will have opened myself up for some criticism from that comment--but I wanted to express it anyway!---

The Pat Charles scenario is a difficult one for me to understand! By no longer being a shareholder of CVIA it is also my way of saying that until I see all the details of the mergers/ acquisitions, the BOM, business plan and projections-and what Pat Charles has in fact brought to the party it will remain a major question remaining unanswered to me!

Having said all this I have a "GUT" feeling that Jack's apparent committment to CVIA will pay off! Time will tell who gets the benefits and to what degree!

For those persuing the legal route , I wish you all well and trust that you achieve what it is you are going after, also an end result that is the best for "ALL" Shareholders?

I will now wait and follow the developments of CVIA and see what transpires!--I am personally encouraged by the fact that CVIA has indicated that a Shareholder Compensation Program is necessary! ( Or at least that's how I understand it!--In my opinion!)

I trust that whatever or wherever the legal actions that many of the CVIA Shareholders appear to be persuing does not hurt the chances of the shareholders that do not view that process to be in their best interests at this point in time!

Sorry for the lengthy posting but I felt it was appropriate!

We have some very sincere and caring/ sharing CVIA Shareholders on this thread ( and of course those that are non-S.I. members!)..

I wish each and everyone of you success in your endeavours!
I continue to encourage you to do what is right for you! It's your hard earned money , you make the decision!

Best Regards,

Wayne J.



To: RockChalk who wrote (5183)5/27/1998 4:44:00 AM
From: D LEE  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 6654
 
Jay, I believe KAA is providing an educational legal avenue
and has no intention to create a mockery of the CVIA Thread.
He is only providing the avenue for -if it becomes necessary,
and only for those who decide to pay for, and utilize it.
If he doesn't do it, somebody with less experience might.

The gray area to look at is the insulting remarks.
I don't think KAA endorses those, but rather, he finds himself
contending politely with an undesirable side effect.
The good he is trying to do is time consuming enough.

Several people feel their loss should at least provide them
a justified insult or two. Perhaps none of them intend to
actually take advantage of what KAA is offering. They may
decide to tone down individual comments as they realize
the ideas are already being adequately expressed, because
over expression diminishes the effect.

With you, I agree the saved time and space might be better
used by preparing for other possible scenarios.

Dave