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 : American Eco (ECGOF, ECX on Toronto exchange) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: MARK BARGER who wrote (2657)	7/8/1998 8:42:00 AM
From: sfh	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 2841

another typical day--i feel comfortable taking 65% in a year on one thing, so i let it go, and watch it double, while those things i replace it with lose everything i have gained. silly me--order backlogs, increasing revenue, and oops--losses for the quarter. i am in at 10 1/2, so it is hard to think of dumping now. funny thing, i thought about dumping at 9 and decided to keep. felt comfortable with support at 7, etc. aargh!!!!!!!!! i also now have margin calls, so i have to take losses. not fun

To: MARK BARGER who wrote (2657)	7/8/1998 9:47:00 AM
From: HedyVP	Respond to of 2841

Mark, thank you for your excellent analysis. Hindsight being 20/20 of course it's so clear when reading the post that the indications were pointing to the incompetence of mgmt. and I should have gotten out. Expensive lesson learned,,,,,, mgmt. is still the same bunch of loosers,so will the stock go even lower? From looking over the different subs.,their earnings,ect. I can see a lot more mis-management,than competent mgmt. here.How could Mc.Ginnis have been so oblivious?

To: MARK BARGER who wrote (2657)	7/8/1998 1:44:00 PM
From: Peter H. Mack	Respond to of 2841

Mark... Excellent review.. When I first got into this sometime back, Mcginnis could do no wrong. He was touted as the genius behind the company. At that time the goals were to get the revenues up through acquisitions. If I remember right, they were talking billion dollar company. Obviously Dominion was key to this plan, but we didn't know it then. They have been fairly successful getting the revenues up, but the expense was dilution of the company. Going hell bent to grow it, has cost us a bunch. Going into Dominion via the back door looks a little risky to me. They have promises of revenue and also losses. Dominion's finances were bad enough to make a real opportunity for ECO,...(maybe). I suspect that ECO's need for cash is still pretty heavy and now their opportunities for financing are becoming poorer. I am not that optimistic about their prospects at this time either. regards pete

To: MARK BARGER who wrote (2657)	7/8/1998 1:44:00 PM
From: Czechsinthemail	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 2841

It was then that I repeatedly asked the company for break-outs on the revenue growth of the different subs. I was told they didn't provide that type of information. I now believe that management itself didn't have a handle of what was going on with the different subs. This would be the incompetence theory. The other possibility is that they knew but were trying to hide the underperformance at existing subs. At various points in the company's history, there have been glaring examples of bad decisions that have cumulatively supported the bad management case. You have to take your pick between "bad management by good guys" or "bad management by skunks". Baird