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 : GLOW - Global Games, Inc. - Great Profit Potential ! -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Thomas George Warner who wrote (4742)	7/16/1998 1:20:00 AM
From: Greg Hodges	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 8879

I have to respond in favor of T.G.W. on the comment about this stock being crap. I cannot recall him ever stating that, but he has had doubts about the stock in the past, and probably will still have more until the stock reaches his level of satisfaction to justify involvement with it. No different than anybody else. As for you comment below on the revenue stream. "And lastly if GLOw has to subcontract large portions of the new deal, and that is what the press release sounded like, than there will be very little revenue stream left for GLOW stockholders....." I have to disagree with you on that T.G.W. As you know from my work in Govt. contracts it is almost always a win win deal when you can sub-contract work out. It saves you G&A, overhead, medical, 401k, profit sharing, vacation, sick leave, etc.... I see this all the time in firm fixed cost contracts. What is different about this, is it should be a continuous stream of revenue from the gaming portion of the site. There would be a little more work up front but then it would go into what I call maintance mode. You would be guaranteed to save cost. But besides all of that, If we go back and look at several of the press releases we see that IGC is a company that Global Games already has a teaming arrangement with for tech support services. ----------------------- MINNEAPOLIS--(BUSINESS WIRE)--July 7, 1998-- Global Games Corp.(OTC BB:GLOW) ........... (5th paragraph down)........ Internet Gaming Corporation (IGC), a private company with whom Global Games already has a licensing agreement in place in Dominica, will participate in this government project and will provide tech support for the Virtual World Casino and Sports Book. IGC will receive a portion of our licensing service fees for their tech support services. The Commonwealth of Dominica and IGC will operate independent sites, but will work cooperatively to the mutual benefit of all parties. -------------------------- What is even bigger news is Global Games developed this gaming software. Not IGC, or anyone else. This means Global Games is going to continually receive revenues from these games as long as the software games are being used. No where in any of the press releases does it say another company is going to receive royalties from this software. Only Global Games. In fact the PR statement on May 5th states it is Global Games "proprietary" software look below. -------------------------------------- MINNEAPOLIS--(BUSINESS WIRE)--May 5, 1998-- Global Games, Corp. (OTC Bulletin Board symbol ''GLOW''), announced today they have reached a definitive agreement to supply Global's proprietary Internet-ready gaming software to Internet Gaming Corporation (IGC). IGC initially plans to offer regular Bingo and Full-Session Bingo on the Internet from its gaming business headquarters in Dominica, West Indies. Subsequent to the introduction of IGC's Internet Bingo game, IGC will offer a full range of Internet Casino games supported by Global Games' Software starting with a Multi-player Java Blackjack Game. Global Games will receive ongoing revenue from IGC's Internet gaming income. After an initial 30-day trial period, Global Games forecasts annual net revenue from its software sales to IGC will reach ......... ------------------------------- Hope this helps everyone. Regards, Greg

To: Thomas George Warner who wrote (4742)	7/16/1998 10:06:00 AM
From: Saturday	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 8879

T.G.W. - I could not believe your post. All of a sudden you are playing Innocent. In the past, you have made questionable statements . Your playing Innocent will not change things. You will still face the responsibility of your behavior. Your apologizing simply does not cut it!

To: Thomas George Warner who wrote (4742)	7/16/1998 2:02:00 PM
From: BigRedMan	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 8879

T.G.W. you said... The comment "Ones that are asked over and over again" is true since these questions are so important to the evaluation of any stock. Without the answers to the questions that I have asked it is impossible for ME to analyze the stock in a satisfactory manner. The problem is, you are like the five year old child who keeps asking for a piece of candy even though there isn't any candy! We plan on getting some candy in the future, and life will be better at that time. However, no matter how loud you scream, you're not getting any candy today! I am not aware that I have made any false statements concerning GLOw, its management or business. I am not entirely certain you've made outright false statements, either. However, you have made insinuations that are a stretch. Additionally, you have seemingly refused to acknowledge certain facts that contradict your insinuations. Believe it or not I have done a tremendous amount of research on this company and its competitors. Maybe so, however, you seem to be (this is the understatement of the decade) predisposed to being down on this stock. AND, you have admitted finding very little information on this stock. You have automatically equated limited information with bad investment. I, on the other hand, equate limited information with outstanding opportunity. Again, I refer you to EMT. I am not stupid (although some would probably debate this issue), if this is a viable investment sector than I would jump on it faster than a duck on a june bug. How fast does a duck jump on a june bug? I differ with you on the issue of revenue, small revenue flows. What does "small revenue flows" mean? . for a stock with over 50M shares is not enough. Number of outstanding shares is for the most part, irrelevant. A more appropriate comparison would be made to market capitalization. For example, there is a company that last year recorded almost $12 billion in revenues. Yet, there are only 1.19 million shares outstanding! WOW! Deal of a lifetime! Get in before everyone else finds out! Er.everyone else already knows. The stock trades for $76,000/share! BTW, I consider a revenues from a single contract that are approximately equal to the market capitalization of the company HUGE! A clear cut objective achievable, published plan is of paramount importance for this stock. Why? Large investors that are necessary to really move the stock will not buy in with out it. We're not talking about Microsoft here! I don't see institutional investors jumping all over this stock just because there is a published business plan! I also differ with your observation about Burnt Church. Moving from a letter of intent to a signed contract for a management contract should have been completed very fast. We've had this discussion before (https://www.siliconinvestor.com/readmsg.aspx?msgid=5113505). You obviously know very little about what a "letter of intent" is. Revisiting my former post, I mentioned in it that my company executed a letter of intent back in March to install a turnkey telecommunications solution at a customer site in San Antonio by June 1, 1998 for $500,000. Last night (4 « months later), we finalized the contract. BTW, the contract calls for a scaled down installation ($430,000) by October 1st at a couple locations in Nebraska. Funny how that final contract differed from the letter of intent. This is hurting the stock now. The only people this is hurting is the short-timers.those with little patience. For those of us who are in for the duration, the "hurting" of the stock is another opportunity to accumulate! And lastly if GLOw has to subcontract large portions of the new deal, and that is what the press release sounded like. This is directly from the press release. "In other related news, Internet Gaming Corporation's (IGC) role in setting up Dominica's gaming site will be to provide technical set-up assistance, computer and software maintenance, and account reconciliation." Where do you get the idea they're subcontracting "large portions" of the new deal? .than there will be very little revenue stream left for GLOW stockholders. From the sounds of the press release, IGC will assist in "setting up" the site and provide ongoing computer and software maintenance. If you knew anything about technical solutions, you would understand that the opportunities realized by leveraging the respective companies' core competencies. Chances are, GLOW will make far more of a profit by subbing out part of the maintenance. Not good.This scenario would give the impression that they are still issuing press releases and have no viable infrastructure to stand alone. WHAT?!?! I suppose HP, Microsoft, Gateway 2000, etc. don't have any infrastructure to stand on either since each of them subs out at least a significant portion of their maintenance! I suppose IBM, Compaq, etc. don't have any infrastructure since each of them "subs out" manufacturing and assembly. Just to explain a few things to you about small companies and IT development. The more you can focus on your core competencies (in GLOW's case, developing web-based casino solutions) and avoid spreading yourself thin, the more successful you will be. If IGC is located in Dominica and has the technical people in place to provide support, why not use them?!?!? BTW, out here in today's business world, it is ubiquitously recognized as good business practice to use customers as vendors. .later. GO BIG RED!!