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.

Technology Stocks : TAVA Technologies (TAVA-NASDAQ) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Mary Beth Ford who wrote (20774)	7/17/1998 10:24:00 AM
From: jan m.	Respond to of 31646

Hi Mary Beth---I'm here, just got back from San Jose. Haven't read the posts yet, but am sticking with my time frame of Tava starting to do well towards the latter part of this year, and really moving in the first part of 99. The fundamentals of the company keep improving--I think some investors are waiting to get past 4th quarter earnings, but by then it may be too late to get in at these prices. IMHO Jan

To: Mary Beth Ford who wrote (20774)	7/17/1998 10:25:00 AM
From: Joseph J. Valenzuela	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 31646

The "Y2K Hoax" is finding its way into semiconductor industry journals??? What is this world coming to?? ---------- EBN's Daily News Digest Will The Millennium Bug Halt Chip Lines (7:50 p.m. EDT, 7/16/98) There could be a chip shortage-maybe a big one-starting Jan. 1, 2000. That's when semiconductor fab lines across the world could start doing funny things because of the millennium bug. As pointed out in an earlier column, OEMs and chip makers face a potential Year 2000 glitch in the embedded code of millions of microcontrollers. And at the Semicon West show last week, industry executives revealed another major concern: that Y2K errors can cause equipment to shut down, run erratically and otherwise foul up production lines. That could bring the chip industry's long-sought end to oversupply, but not the way they intended. If fabs are affected by the Y2K gremlins, it could shake up the chip market, literally overnight-at the stroke of twelve. As with the microcontroller Y2K threat, no one really knows the dimensions of the problem. Sematech has developed a software package to check nineteen of the most likely Y2K time bombs ticking away in equipment code. Consortium officials said more than 90% of the equipment failed in initial Y2K testing. To be fair, that included many minor glitches that could easily be remedied. But it also revealed that many tools shut down, others wouldn't turn off, and still more continued running but produced erroneous results or data. A fab line tool can be Year-2000 compliant, but fail when bad data is fed into the machine from external sources. Since a fab is a highly complex, integrated web of equipment and software, the potential for Y2K errors is frightening. Chip makers and tool suppliers vary all over the lot in how well they are moving to fix the Y2K bugs. Texas Instruments and IBM get high marks for tackling the millennium problem early, but even these companies are pressing their tool suppliers to work more closely with them to find and defuse the Y2K mines. OEMs have a huge vested interest in helping the chip industry fix its Year 2000 problems. The more elite OEMs have already headed off the Y2K crisis in their own corporate computer systems or in IT products they sell into the market. They should move quickly to share that Y2K expertise with their chip suppliers to help ensure uninterrupted supply. President Clinton last week proposed legislation to exempt such industry Y2K collaboration from antitrust and liability laws. That's a helpful step, but the Year 2000 fix mainly involves a massive time-consuming review of every piece of software code, and an equally laborious task of writing and implementing fixes. All this costs hundreds of billions of dollars in the total global Y2K software sweep-for which companies can't bill a nickel of revenue. That puts an added strain on the chip industry at a time when earnings are awful, and when companies are hard pressed for R&D and capital resources. It would be ironic if the Semiconductor Industry Association's National Technology Roadmap was brought to a crashing halt by two little digits of obsolete code. URL: pubs.cmpnet.com

To: Mary Beth Ford who wrote (20774)	7/17/1998 11:43:00 AM
From: JOHN IACOVACCI	Respond to of 31646

Your right about responding I no longer will. This Y2K momentum is just starting. My opinion is we will get mass movement into sector soon. Pressure on companies for Y2K compliancy will force spending. SEC, BANKS,INSURANCE CO'S & U.S. government will adapt policies which will ensure Y2K compliancy and time tables. Most Y2K companies will benefit espescilly tava because of the mission critical services that TAVA can and does perform. I wouldn't be surprised if the U.S. governments contracts TAVA for embedded systems help and to keep global stability. Clinton spoke on the necessity for us to support ASIAN economies. If U.S. government feels foreign utilities will be in danger they will step in and provide support. The WORLD looks for the U.S. in technology leadership. The internet starting building a worldwide GLOBAL economy. With the net more countries and companies can learn how to repair their factories, just go to www.tavatech.com.

To: Mary Beth Ford who wrote (20774)	7/17/1998 11:56:00 AM
From: airborn	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 31646

There is a lot of potential business out there for TAVA and other Y2K company's, eg. SEC testimony by commissioner Laura Unger in June was an eye-opener. "An astonishing 73 percent of companies have not begun their code remediation," says Peraino. SEC testimony is an eye-opener for investors Year 2000: Trouble ahead, say some By Thom Calandra, CBS MarketWatch Last Update: 11:16 AM July 16, 1998 SAN FRANCISCO (CBS.MW) -- The Securities & Exchange Commission is shedding light on publicly held companies and their frantic race to conquer Year 2000 testing hurdles. The problem is that the SEC's analysis of the Year 2000 millennium bug has received scant attention. Instead, this week and last, the financial press has looked at Wall Street's early tests, led by the Securities Industry Association in New York, and Year 2000 issues that could dog the U.S. Army. Hancock Rothert & Bunshoft, a California law firm, says one analysis by the SEC should send shivers down the spines of stock market investors. "The Year 2000 remediation effort is lagging," says Peter J. Whalen, a partner at the law firm, whose Web site, 2000law.com, is one of the better repositories of data and news on the looming computer bug that could wreak havoc with corporate networks on Jan. 1, 2000. Fellow partner Vito C. Peraino points out that SEC testimony by commissioner Laura Unger in June was an eye-opener. "An astonishing 73 percent of companies have not begun their code remediation," says Peraino. The last time we touched base with Peraino and Whalen, they were suggesting that if anything could puncture the high-flying U.S. stock market, it was the prospect of a worldwide recession, sparked by a pesky Year 2000 bug. To be sure, lawyers have a vested interest in whipping up the Year 2000 waters. Their livelihood depends on the flood of millennium lawsuits that are expected from shareholders and consumers. Peraino points out that the SEC's most recent analysis is based only on disclosures of stock-market-traded companies that mentioned the Year 2000 dilemma in their reports. "An amazing 30 percent of publicly traded companies' annual reports did not mention the phrase Year 2000," he said. The reports in question were those filed after January 1998. The SEC reviewed disclosure statements of 1,023 publicly traded companies. There are more than 9,000 publicly traded companies in U.S. stock markets. Unger, in her testimony before Congress, said SEC Commissioner Arthur Levitt this year will mail a letter to chief executive officers, reminding them of the significance of Year 2000 issues. Peraino, in the best tradition of his legal profession, sees darkness ahead. "It is possible that a significant number of companies chose not to disclose because their Year 2000 efforts are at ground zero," he says. Potential legal fallout: mutual fund managers might be called to task for holding stocks of companies that decline to disclose their efforts to revise computer code. Unger's testimony on Year 2000 issues can be found on the Web at sec.gov. For those with a brighter view of corporate America's handling of the millennium bug, Unger's report conceded the number of companies "mentioning Year 2000 issues has increased dramatically." It's just that most companies are not following the SEC's latest legal guidance on Year 2000 disclosure to shareholders and customers. Stay tuned, like for another 17 months.

To: Mary Beth Ford who wrote (20774)	7/18/1998 2:37:00 PM
From: JOHN IACOVACCI	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 31646

My apologies for more Wexler subject but after reading more FRAUD POSTS on yahoo I will copy my response here: I do believe Rbullota when he says excessive hype will cause damage and false expectations to this stock. So I only will make statements of the stock price direction and in my opinion and that is all I can offer is my opinion the stock price should rise. TAVA is priced at 9 1/6 a share. The probability that this stock will rise in value is higher than the probability that this stock will fall in value. Why? Timing and market demand. TAVA is proven to offer necessary services for Y2K factory remediation. Y2K is 17 months away and major fortune 500 companies are paying TAVA now to fix their problems. These payments are in FACT ACCELERATING. The demand for their services will continue to increase for the next 17 months. My simple analysis. Now onto Mr. Wexler He is running a well organized CON GAME on this board and SI. The redundancy and repetitiveness is a major part this CON. He wants people to SELL SHARES so TAVA price will fall so HIM and his Co-Conspirators can profit because they invested in a SHORT PLAY for TAVA. The reason I use the words CON GAME is because their is absolutely no proof or facts to support his stance of a fraudulent stock scam. This is a LIE. And CON MEN use lies to CHEAT PEOPLE OUT OF MONEY. TAVA might go up or might go down. The point is DO NOT GET SCAMMED BY CON-ARTISTS!