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 : PLFM - Undervalued with great potential -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: BIG EYE who wrote (3028)	5/27/1998 6:38:00 AM
From: suntzu	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 9096

Yongzhi only apologized as a courtesy to other PLFM investors. Not on behalf of company errors. In fact he confirmed Platform's plausibility of their mission claims. Here is another company that is filed offshore biz.yahoo.com I don't think they are a scam, and if you do a little research you can find many others. The slide show on the web page is excellent. It is under the test demonstration portion. It gives official answers to many of the questions raised hear. (no double-talk)

To: BIG EYE who wrote (3028)	5/27/1998 9:25:00 AM
From: Yongzhi Yang	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 9096

Please read post #2991 again. I did not apologize because "the PLFM company information regarding the engine was incorrect". In that post I said I got the number "4 gallon per hour" from LPE and calculated the number of hours the plane can fly: 200/4 = 50. Considering that take off may consume more fuel, I concluded that plfm's estimation of "48 hours" is about right. I only feel sorry that I did not investigate this issue until it is brought up and caused so much confusion. yongzhi >In #2991 Yongzhi realizes that the PLFM company information >regarding the engine was incorrect. He apologized, but >why?...and for what??