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 : DGIV-A-HOLICS...FAMILY CHIT CHAT ONLY!! -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Silver__7 who wrote (17539)	7/9/1998 7:03:00 AM
From: risk-averse	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 50264

Thanks to Carrie Lee of the WSJ and to Silver for the post. This article demonstrates the shady dealings of Liberty and how they tried and perhaps continue to hurt DGIV in an illegal fashion. I suspect that now that this is in the open, someone will be running for cover!! Names of variuos people working at Liberty were put forth, but we need to remember that ALL S**T falls from the TOP. I would be VERY SUSPECT of any companies represented by Liberty. The fact is that the contract between Liberty and DGIV has been terminated. DGIV will now move on its own merits, un-bothered by such illegal obstacles.

To: Silver__7 who wrote (17539)	7/9/1998 8:20:00 AM
From: bullmarket	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 50264

Quoted from the article: "He acknowledges learning of a rumor about European sellers from Internet message boards, but says: "I have no direct knowledge of anyone calling [Digitcom investors] and telling anyone to sell their shares,...." So, are we to believe that employees at the PR firm just decided one day to pick up the office phone, to "reach out and touch" DGIV investors and ILLEGALLY tell them to sell DGIV shares (thus jeopardizing their jobs and perhaps even their LIBERTY?) WITHOUT the boss'knowledge and approval? Are we also to believe that naysayers just "innocently" find themselves on the DGIV thread as indenpendent individuals WITHOUT A PRESET AGENDA, all wanting to ALTRUISTICALLY help their fellow investors? NOT!!!!!!!!

To: Silver__7 who wrote (17539)	7/9/1998 10:17:00 AM
From: Howard C.	Respond to of 50264

Perhaps what the WSJ said about Mr. Greig is not true because that would make him a low class, sleazy, vindictive, and, possibly, criminal type person.....we wouldn't want that, would we....and we might all have to file a class action lawsuit, wouldn't we? Hi Jo, how are you today?

To: Silver__7 who wrote (17539)	7/9/1998 10:29:00 AM
From: charles moore	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 50264

Very interesting article. There is a poster on this board called ELK and I wonder if that is any coincidence to Elkins.I also remember people posting on this board about the Swiss rumor. As far as the Denial of calling people this is not hard to prove because if Shareholders were called they would know it.Anyone that was called as suggested by Cheryl should notify the SEC.I understand that a complaint can be filed right on the Internet at WWW.SEC.GOV. Charles