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.

Gold/Mining/Energy : Tri-Vision & The V-Chip -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: trenzich who wrote (3035)	6/5/1998 11:49:00 AM
From: D.E. Shetland	Respond to of 5743

You've got to be kidding? Those don't even touch on the issues raised. Furthermore, I'd like your answers. Once again: 1. Doesn't the fact that the guiding light, Mr. Browne (the ultimate insider since he started most of their investment companies), sells as much Soundview and Acacia as he can disturb you? 2. You claim it is an illegal act to compensate a companies auditor's with shares. If so, are you concerned Mr. F was "issued" "finder's warrants" while their only outside auditor? 3. How did Merkwerks increase over 20x in value in 3 months? I guess you all missed the details on that are are entirely incorrect in your response. Look at the facts as stated in their reports. It's not the only one either, same thing happened a few more times. 4. If Acacia knows the value of these investments better than anyone else, and Acacia is in essence an investment fund as they themselves state, then why should one pay 4x greater than they themselves are willing to pay for the exact same investments? Especially since many are minority holdings or have no other financial backers but Acacia? Once again, exhibiting the rookie analytical skills you're now famous for, one should pay more than asset value for something where the assets have an identifiable future income stream, but not for something that sucks cash, has never, and looks never to have any recurring income streams. In this case, look at it as a tradeable bag of investment assets --that's all they are now, even under their own admission. We'll stop at these 4. You just don't seem to have answers, do you? Looks like you're in on the hype job like the rest of them. By the way, if you read all my posts correctly, I always stated high risk/high reward and nothing much will happen until sales are in the bag. Still stick by it and, yes, still waiting. But I've got a WalMart/Sears/Circuit City -size idea that sales are coming up quickly. Hummmmm, I wonder who TVL's meeting this week, and next week? I wonder how many units have already been manufactured? I wonder whose technology will be available (producing income) for those who want a ratings decoder? Soundview? He-he-he. So let me see, should one pay US$55mil for a company with $8mil of cash on the balance sheet, a product that could earn a considerable amount of money if successfully distributed and marketed, another new product (addreasable PayTV converter) that could earn very good money, and an underlying business in IR's and cable equipment that is profitable with revenues in the order of C$9mil or pay $80mil for a company with some questionable patents and IP that need far more money to remotely reach the commercial stage, has small investments in micro-tiny companies competing against some extremely well-financed companies years ahead of them, well continually issue more shares as long as they can fool people into believeing a portfolio worth no more than $20mil to them is worth $80mil to you, and has questionable accounting and corporate governance issues? ..cash sucking...please write another check today, TZ. A few more "consultant fees" need to be paid to related parties and Mr. F and Mr. Browne are no where to be seen.