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 : MIDL .... A Real Sleeper -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Dusty who wrote (3258)	8/9/1998 10:14:00 PM
From: Ga Bard	Respond to of 7039

I have the original draf from the company of the Exxon release and all the numerous changes. Plus Exxon state the news release was accurate and it was approved by the company prior to being release. :-) GB

To: Dusty who wrote (3258)	8/9/1998 10:20:00 PM
From: Binder	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 7039

Dusty, I agree with you, to an extent. (wow...we are rolling here) While I think that the news needs to come from an officer of the company, I also understand that officers would not generally draft the release themselves. Rather, they should have final "sign off" before anything is actually sent to the wire services. Therefore, as long as the content is approved by an officer, I would think that the author is released from liability. Now if the Exxon release had been done without the knowledge and consent of the board, I, too would have sold at the $40 level and never looked back. But it simply wasn't that way. I cannot remember if you were one of the people in telephone contact with the company at that time or not, but we were all being told on the phone by Dan Fisher and John Spriggs that the Exxon thing was for real. I think, in the case of Midland, it will always come down to the root of the dishonesty...Dan Fisher. No offense, but this is just how I see it. :-) Binder

To: Dusty who wrote (3258)	8/9/1998 10:23:00 PM
From: Kurt N	Respond to of 7039

>>I will (while we are being honest) here tell you that if I had known that an officer of the company did not draft the Exxon press release; I would have sold every share I held when the price of the "P" was at 40 bucks and the common was up too. I would have never looked back and would have made a ton "O" bucks and not lost a dime.<< What if the CEO of a Fortune 500 company (or other big company) has a Press Release he wants to issue, and tells his personal secretary the major points to be covered in a random order and to use that to draft it up and fix grammer and re-arrange (edit) for flow, etc. It's not as if Gary made up any of the stuff. He was told what to cover and what information that was to be communicated. All he did was re-arrange the information in a coherent and professional manner (and avoiding the usage of Bardonics). Press Releases shouldn't contain spelling errors/typos/poor grammar and should be broken up into appropriate paragraphs in the correct order. In short good quality writing, which the appropriate officers reviewed for errors/ommissions and approved and gave the go-ahead to send out. Some CEO's can't write for sh*t, and they delegate because of that or else they are too busy doing other important things but still want to communicate to the shareholders. In short it is somebody's responsiblity to make sure that before a Press Release goes out, it meets business standard/professional quality. Send out a cover letter for a job with bad grammar or spelling error and it goes in the waste basket, same thing with PR's some people will sell a stock due to a poorly written PR. Kurt