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 : PKGP (Packaging Plus) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: sedahS who wrote (4307)	6/27/1998 11:50:00 AM
From: Brady B.	Respond to of 4783

If enough people call Altomare and ICC, they will get tired of hearing the phone ring and print a clarification. The numbers are in a previous post. I have called twice. bb

To: sedahS who wrote (4307)	6/27/1998 11:59:00 AM
From: Sly_	Respond to of 4783

I agree sedahS. I do not read where ICC has severed ties with PKGP. This and the 100 million share rumor sounds like a bunch of BS. Sly_

To: sedahS who wrote (4307)	6/27/1998 12:14:00 PM
From: Jester	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 4783

It is common for investors in a stock to be suspicious of news. That is normal. Being suspicious is good. As a result, people have a tendency to doubt bad news regardless of the source. I used to call ICC fairly regularly after they had signed the contract with PKGP to ask when they would be adding the company to the intro page of their website. They already had it under the 'request info' page. It took them 3 weeks to get it on the website, but they did it. It took them 1 day to have it removed. If the float is 100 million and the estimate of the short was 30 - 60 million, then the naked short doesn't exist. No short squeeze. Also I would expect a major dilution due to a count that high. Also, a reverse split would seem inevitable. Every share out there issued by PKGP must be honored regardless of how many there are. This, in addition to their main source of business, APAC, which is almost non-existent as a formed business could spell big trouble in the near future. It's time for the company to provide some answers. I will probably quit posting here after this unless people want me to respond to specific questions, because I have no further interest. Investors should continue to be skeptical of my posts and everyone else's until the company starts answering some questions. Good luck to all. djb

To: sedahS who wrote (4307)	6/27/1998 6:27:00 PM
From: blash	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 4783

Sedah, Jeff, Brady and rest of SI board. My apologies for possibly misreading/misinterpreting info posted elsewhere. I have not called ICC personally because it was already after closing hours when I became aware of the fact that PKGP was no longer listed on the ICC webpage. However, at least two people who have been posting (zbyte on SI and Errick on RB) both called ICC and were told that PR was being handled by the Company, not ICC. I've re-read the ICC post on RB multiple times and agree that they are outlining their responsibilities. You may be right that it is nothing more than this. If this is true, then again I apologize to ICC and to the SI readers for creating an inflammatory situation where none existed. However, I am still curious as to the motivation of that post and the timing with respect to the deletion of PKGP from their webpage. My belief is that some level of turmoil exists between these parties and we shall know more next week.