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: BlueFox who wrote (8999)	6/16/1998 3:06:00 PM
From: I Am John Galt	Respond to of 18444

I'll take 9000, thank you :O) MG.

To: BlueFox who wrote (8999)	6/16/1998 4:27:00 PM
From: PartyTime	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 18444

>>>No, Lichtman responded and got into more contradictions. Hayton has yet to respond. But if he were to, would that not just be more contradictions as well? I think it unlikely that suits will be filed. Dragging up old mud usually isn't something one can sue over (otherwise we wouldn't have sport called "running for office").<<< Since I don't know what he'd have to say, I'd be fair and therefore temper how I make my judgment. I guarantee you, though, if this was a bluchip stock and we were bigtime stockholders, I'm certain we would have heard a response from him. But this Zulu is not {YET--LOL} a bluechip stock and most of us are not big-time, big-name shareholders. Zulu is, in point of fact, a developing stock and we are the riskiest investors of any in the market. So what if Hayton and/or Zulu simply calculated the situation as follows: Well, all investors in penny stocks know they take a bigger risk. And we know for a fact that Zulu's got something big happening and the merit of its growth and maturity will speak for itself. If, in the end, shareholders will be more than satisfied, why should we now get bogged down in petty, nitpicking battles with bad press that we know comes from former disgruntled employees and/or competitive forces? Instead, why not concentrate on maturing the company first--building the right bridges (nice post, Matty)--and then see what investors think? We know they're gonna like what happens in the end! If we find we have to struggle along for a bit because we've been harmed or damaged by Wired and Stock Detective's negative and/or libelous remarks, well later on we can then consider filing lawsuit or maybe even lauch a counterattack. [Has anyone considered the above scenario? Does it even seem plausible?]