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 : Tri-Vision & The V-Chip -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: pipick who wrote (3472)	7/15/1998 7:58:00 PM
From: Clement	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 5743

pipick, A little cynical are we <g>? > let me make one thing clear:investment banking firms do deals > because it makes money FOR THIER FIRM. That is the ONLY reason. They > could care less about what happens to the company they finance. Based on what I have heard from analysts of a few boutiques on Bay Street, CIBC is known for quality of their research. Investment banks really do care about what happens to the companies that they finance because it ensures that they make money for their firm. CIBC has been known to maintain a high level of integrity in their financings and has turned down several potentially lucrative deals because they did not believe in the issue. Investment firms will not bring something public that they cannot recommend. IPO's are where firms make the most money. If their companies flop, institutions (where they sell most of their IPO's), will be more reluctant to buy from them in the future. I don't know about your arguments for TVL not being a good investment, and I'm not very partial for it being at the price it is in my portfolio, but if you are going to come up with an argument for selling it, there are better ones without alluding to false assumptions. You can sit around all day and discuss conspiracy theories, but when it comes right down to it, all we can do as investors is either inform ourselves as much as we can in the companies that we invest in, or sell. Plain and simple. Arguing what could possibly be, without a shred of information or proof to base a theory, is not only a waste of time, but hard on the nerves. Clement

To: pipick who wrote (3472)	7/15/1998 8:48:00 PM
From: Mac	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 5743

pipick : My observation is that this gentleman , being a director, does in fact have an interest in this particular company. But whatever you decide, it was only a suggestion. Personally,if I was TVL or a prospective retail chain; I would be glad to sit back for a month or so to see what happens between ACRI & PG (re: licencing). No use tying up product in the shelf and getting caught up in a legal battle, is there? What happens in this next 30 days may well set a precedence on further issues & save a lot of time and money. The FCC will have a great interest in this as well, in the event ACRI tries to get out of control. Worst case is it shaves a couple percent off of the EPS, but using PG as the first to try the waters, it may cost nothing at all. This is only pure speculation of the current delay ,on my part, but with product on the shelf and ACRI sitting idle, or at least not ringing up any deals as of yet, the coast is starting to look clear. ACRI is dying to try something to ring in a little change $$ If they give it away to PG, they might also have to do the same for PG. The FCC is watching, you know! Meantime, there is product ready to ship and retailers ready to sell, a law in place, and TVL still has the best & cheapest product on the market.