Following is a letter I e-mailed to someone regarding some questions that were asked me about FTEL. I hope this better clarifies where I am coming from. I deleted the name of the person to whom I responded in order to protect their privacy.
Following is a copy of the letter:
Dear X*******, I believe you were jumping to conclusions in your last PM to me. I will try to specifically answer your questions, or clarify the points I made in my last message.
* * * * *
<<Valuespec,
I suggest you re-read my PM to you. I fail to understand your statement "I just replied in depth almost all the same questions you asked"???? I asked You some questions! NO ONE ELSE!>>
I just answered someone else's questions and replied with a message that contained many of the answers you sought. I was not saying that you PM'd me before nor did I think you did so under someone else's name.
I answered quite a number of questions today, of which your's was just one.
* * * * *
<<Contrary to you, I Strongly Believe the acquisitions of the NATO network and LDNet are GOOD, solid business decisions and will bring in revenues in the not-to-distant future.>>
The likely best case scenario is that the company will slightly offset its huge quarterly losses (over $ 1 mil for the Q ended March 31). This COULD be a small step in the right direction, but based on the past history of FTEL, I will have to see it to believe it. Of course, I could be wrong. Who knows?
We don't seem to differ much here, unless you believe the NAT network and LDNet will result in them significantly reducing quarterly losses.
* * * * *
<< I have read the press releases, SEC filings, CEO's messages, etc., etc. and have the FORESIGHT to see how these acquisitions are MOST POSITIVE in building the FNET International Telephone Co. How come you CANNOT SEE THIS????>>
We both read the same things, then, and have come to different conclusions. This happens all the time, of course, so let's agree to disagree and wait to see what actually happens.
* * * * *
<<Please DO NOT TWIST my words!>>
This comment seemed unnecessary and mean-spirited. I don't even know why you said that.
* * * * *
<<As far as the Intrine order being responsible for moving this stock to $10, I suggest you review the history. The stock moved to $10 WAY BEFORE INTRINE WAS ever mentioned as a possible client!>>
I did and I summarize as follows:
* October 16, 1997 announcement of order (later found to be Intrine):
ftel.com
* High stock price of over $ 10 was reached week ended October 17, 1997
Week ended Oct 10 high was $ 7.19
Week ended Oct 03 high was $ 3.87
Week ended Sep 27 high was $ 2.25
To me it seems likely that the news of the order was leaked before the actual news came out. The actual high was made the week the news came out. You can verify this for yourself by looking at your own set of charts.
I might also add that the impotent Oct 16, 1997 announcement was used as an oportunity to sell many FTEL shares. Have you looked at Frank's stock holdings around this time? You can track them via the many S-1's that were completed in the time period.
* * * * *
<<This thread has talked about the IPO over the years - I would not call it a hyped subject!>>
The hype I am talking about came from company officers. For example, read the following company message dated Jan 19, 1997:
valuespec.com
Whatever happened to that optimistic tone for 1997? What happened to June 1998? Neither time frames were met, even amoungst what I considered hype.
I offer you the following link containing past company officer letters. To me, these are filled with unfulfilled "dreams":
valuespec.com
* * * * *
<< And I Believe you are totally wrong about more FTEL shares being issued as some kind of Penalty!! Where's something to substantiate this guesswork of yours?>>
This is more than guess work. I've copied the following for your convenience:
<<However, if FNet fails to complete a public offering by June 30, 1998, the Holder has the option, upon written notice to FNet and FTEL no later than July 31, 1998, to convert to "Series C Exercise Option #2" (in lieu of Series C Exercise Option #1), which entitles the holder to purchase a number of shares of Common Stock of the Company, equal to one hundred percent (100%) of the aggregate purchase price of the Subscriber's Preferred Stock divided by the Fixed Conversion Price exercisable at the Fixed Conversion Price.>>
Following is a link found in valuespec.com which has the source and a more full context of this and other notes on FTEL:
valuespec.com
* * * * *
<<I am totally baffled by this statement of yours! "The recent purchases, if like past news, which I expect, will come to naught.">>
Since FTEL has disappointed in the past, why not this time? That is what I meant to communicate.
* * * * *
<< And I see others have asked you questions along this vein today, and YOU have not answered them! These purchases COME with REVENUES! Do you just refuse to read those parts of the newsreleases and articles?>>
My words may have been too strong. Let me say that the news is not path-changing news, IMO. The income probably won't do much to help the bottom line.
Look at the recent small revenues and large losses. I expect this to continue and even a couple hundred thousand dollars in net income per quarter, yet alone six months, will do much:
valuespec.com
I also would point out that for the quarter ended March 31, 1998, the company lost well over one million dollars on under $ 400,000 in revenues.
* * * * *
<<When was the last time FTEL purchased any entity??>>
During 1996 two business acquistions were made. Nether did much, though as I recall, some thought they were a bigger deal then they ended up being.
<< Issued or committed to issue 110,000 shares of its common stock valued at $75,000 during fiscal 1996 in connection with two business acquisitions.>>
The former quote was taken from page F-19 of the Dec 9, 1997, S-1:
edgar-online.com
* * * * *
<<FTEL/FNET is now lightyears away from where they were just one year ago!>>
This is hard to say, but based on revenues, things don't seem great, and based on earnings, I'd say things are getting worse. The company has about $ 7 mil in cash and is burned almost $ 1.4 mil last quarter. If they don't make money soon, they may need to sell more stock, etc., IMO.
* * * * *
<<These recent purchases ARE BRILLIANT! IMO! They are necessary to expand the international NextGen Telcom and AGAIN - bring in revenues at the same time! I wish ALL business DEALS could be that SWEET!>>
Growth is needed, but these purchases are not near enough to put the company out of danger (using up cash fast).
* * * * *
<<FYI - The Tempest has been demoed by more cos. than any other gateway co. today! The result of these demoes was the request of additional features - and NOT that companies weren't interested in the equipment OR that the equipment DIDN'T WORK! PLEASE!>>
You can only go by what you hear. I'll believe the product is sellable when they show me the pudding (storm of orders). A product that needs additional features, or whatever, and is still a product that is not what a buyer wants is still unsellable !
* * * * *
<<You are way out of line and if you had been reading any of the progress in this respect, you would know how insane that statement of yours was!>>
Again, it appears we have a differing opinion. The future will reveal who was right. For now, we can both just guess. Hopefully, not using guesses based on emotion, but based on being pragmatic.
* * * * *
<<I can go on and continue to make comments to all of yours, but I see that as I suspected, you are not familiar with the Internet Telephony business in general and are not well versed in the developments of this co.>>
I feel I've done my homework. Who knows, maybe I'm wrong. I feel 'm familiar with FTEL and hype stocks in general.
* * * * *
<<I also do not appreciate the references of certain posters on this thread to the NVID scam! You have tried this angle openly before on this thread, and IT DIDN'T WORK! nor will it sit well with me in any PM from you!>>
I guess you haven't read the SI NVID tread yet and read how RB and friends were pushing that one. I'm sorry you don't like it, but it is something to note, though really no more than that.
* * * * *
<<I will refrain from throwing the DIANA scam in your face if you consent to leave this thread. AFTERALL, as you have stated more than once - you are neither LONG nor SHORT in it! So please spare us any further dialogue.>>
You can mention DNA anytime you wish. In fact, I have a link to that in the FTEL website. I made a good amount of money on DNA and posted when I bought and when I sold. Also, as I predicted, a big contract was announced, though the Business Week arcticle shades that fact (Concentric placed a large order).
* * * * *
<<I can now see why people have accused you of avoiding answers to their questions and twisting the facts.>>
I've answered every question, I believe, that you placed in your last PM to me and this one.
* * * * *
<<If You feel that I have misjudged you gggg, please PM me and prove to me (with FACTS) where I'm wrong!
Take care,>>
X********, I hope this helps you better understand where I am coming from. In fact, because you asked a good amount of good questions and because it took me a while to answer them with documentation, I decided to post my response without mentioning your name. I hope that others who have the same questions will better understand where I am coming from regarding FTEL.
May we agree to disagree and may we prosper in whatever we do !
Sincerely,
VALUESPEC
valuespe.com
FTEL: ~ $2.56a |
