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 : FRANKLIN TELECOM (FTEL) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Stephen B. Temple who wrote (36173)	7/15/1998 10:38:00 AM
From: Michael Dickerson	Respond to of 41046

EXCELLENT POST TEMP!!!!! You have echoed my sentiments exactly!!!! I am not "down" on FTEL... its just that, as you said, the cards have been dealt to them. Fair or not, good, bad, or indifferent, they have no choice but to play with what they have been dealt. I am concerned, as you are, and I am one of the few lucky ones on this board in that I am up more than double my average cost, even at the current prices.

To: Stephen B. Temple who wrote (36173)	7/15/1998 10:39:00 AM
From: elk	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 41046

Temp a simple lesson in economics, You do not increase value of FTEL, by diluting equity ownership of FNet, you decrease FTEL value. Its very easy... JMHO

To: Stephen B. Temple who wrote (36173)	7/15/1998 10:40:00 AM
From: bareskiis	Respond to of 41046

Tempy.....for what its worth and since I KNOW WLV reads this thread, I agree with you and your scenario......unless something MAJOR is announced, "outside investors looking IN" have NO confidence in FTEL IMHO and that is reflected in the share price at present.....we have seen the potential of JV's and they all "look" promising....we need a MAJOR move to make $4 by middle of August and the market is saying SHOW ME!!!! I vote with ya for what it is worth....... LongSTRONGFTELbare

To: Stephen B. Temple who wrote (36173)	7/15/1998 2:18:00 PM
From: Seth L.	Respond to of 41046

Interesting post temp but I'm sorry buddy I have to disagree. Without reading on I'm sure there are many who will agree with you but economically you are doing the shareholders an injustice by dilution. As for Shareholder confidence I wonder how confident everyone was after we dropped from 10 to 6? Call me a bozo but I am confident @ 2.40 and I will be if we go to .81. Why? because I trust my dd. I have done ok trading my whole life based on research and I have done my share here. I realize many have bought based on rumors or hype or combo of both but after they put the dollars in and saw the erosion instead of freaking they better have looked a little closer. When this company starts its move up, shareholder confidence will not be the engine. As for the 144s I AGREE STOP DESIST CLOSE THEM. As a shareholder I can appreciate that when the stock moves up that officers want to take fruit from the tree. But if they are 100% behind Franks dream than they can file 30 days after we hit a new high confident that the price will hold. By filing in a down environment sends the signal that I want some bucks before she falls again. That does not come under shareholder confidence that just deters potential buyers from feeding these sellers. These are just my opinions. Temp I appreciate your posts they are well thoughtout (even if I think they are wrong.ggg) seth

To: Stephen B. Temple who wrote (36173)	7/15/1998 2:20:00 PM
From: Al Krasberg	Respond to of 41046

Temp - I wholeheartedly agree that investor confidence is the problem. It's strange to see everything falling into place, and the stock price falling as well. Franklin has issued too many shoot-youself-in-the-foot statements. That, plus insider selling, a stream of 144s, and a barrage of crafty posts by VS has left us reeling. 1) In addition to Frank's personal buy-back, I would love to see a ban on insider selling for 18 months, or, as you say it, until 12 months after the IPO. I would like to see some numbers on the buy-back. 2) I would like to see ALL public releases from the company analysed by a professional who is better able to judge their potential impact (or possibly by the board). Frank must realize by now that PR is not exactly one of his strong points. 3) I don't see the point of issuing one-for-ten FNET shares to FTEL shareholders. I think it would be a waste of time and energy and have zero effect. Cheers