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 : Solv Ex (SOLVD) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: JJB who wrote (5687)	6/10/1998 12:07:00 PM
From: norwalk hawk	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 6735

I heard today that the hearing for Kalamar's claim is set for Friday June 19. My sources tell me that Kalamar is just trying to draw this out in hopes that Solvex will buy them off to get bankruptcy behind them. But my sources also told me that Kalamar would not get their 750,000 shares and that was wrong. Mike

To: JJB who wrote (5687)	6/12/1998 12:49:00 AM
From: WTMHouston	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 6735

JJB: I, too, appreciate your dedication, efforts, and even-handedness. It would have been very easy for you simply not to post the material derogatory to Solv - especially the NASD report. I, for whatever it is worth, applaud you for it. It won't get any of your money back - unfortunately - but it sure adds to your credibility stock, IMO. I gave up a long time ago thinking that anyone here would convince anyone else of anything that they didn't already believe, so I won't even try by including my view of the NASD report. I suspect that most on both sides see what - and only what - they want to see in the NASD report. A couple questions for anyone that would like to volunteer answers: 1. What motive did/does Timpton have to provide inaccurate info on Solv? I don't know if he has a motive or not, just curious. (BTW, in advance, I don't think that "competitor's former employee" is a motive without more - by that standard, standing alone, JR has a motive to tube Solv as well). 2. What bias does the NASD have against Solv and what, if anything is their motive to delist a company that is really eligible for listing? Whatever the merits of the content, the portion of the transcript JJB posted sounded pretty fair to me. One final note - In my opinion, even if every word that every Solv long has spoken about all the misdeeds done by others to the company are completely and wholly true and accurate, no current or prior Solv shareholder will ever see a single dime from it either directly or from appreciated stock value. Solv may someday or year or decade become sucessful in spite of itself and everything else, but it won't be because of any recovery from lawsuits. If it ever happens, and ever is a long time, it will be because - and only because - Solv has gotten its business act together. Troy P.S. - It's late and I'm tired so I didn't bother to speel check this post: mea culpa.....