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 : Zulu-tek, Inc. (ZULU) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Jon Tara who wrote (13719)	9/10/1998 12:23:00 PM
From: Jon Tara	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 18444

Here is another example of twisted thought processes on the Yahoo Psychic Network. This one was posted by Coffee_IV: "The way I see it, if there are a total of 15,500,000 shares outstanding, and monthly average gross is 1.29 million, then that is a gross of $1 a share per year. The net could be a modest 1% and the PE of this stock is 1. For a company that apparently is competing with DCLK, that would be great. No, it would be better than great." Letsee, 1.29 * 12 (a bad assumption, but I'll accept it for this purpose...) = 15.48. OK, close enough. $1/share in revenues. 1% net = .01/share in revenues. P/E = 1.25/.01 = 125 Where did he get a P/E of 1? Of course, if the net is 10%, you've got a P/E of 12.5. But I suspect that, like all Internet advertising companies, they have a loss, and a negative P/E. Without full financials, who is to know? Why did they release a revenue figure without an income figure?

To: Jon Tara who wrote (13719)	9/10/1998 12:25:00 PM
From: PartyTime	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 18444

This is all I'm going to say regarding your behavior of last night, which you are now spilling into today. I'm not going to go there. If you persist, I will deem there is nothing useful that can result from communicating with you any further. Regarding the questions: Jon, there's a big difference. The quality of what I answered and the quality of what you answered is in the record of past posting. The facts, which can be confirmed by a review of this past posting, are as follows: 1) I answered your several questions forthrightly. No doubt about that. 2) You did not answer my one question. Quite simply, when I asked you why you wanted to know anything about Zulu, you dodged my question. That's all I'm going to say. Regarding your response to today's news? The fact of the matter is you never have and never will give Zulu a chance to grow and develop its own identity. You are severely and unfairly critical before you even have all facts before you. An example of this is where you've been highly critical of Hayton, without making ANY attempt to discover what his viewpoints are in the issues you proclaim to be concerned about. You are further critical of anything Zulu does, without making any effort to personally investigate the company. To prove me wrong, then please name an individual from Zulu with whom you have had a conversation and indicate the extent of that communication. Alternatively, all you do is sit daily at your computer, chopping to pieces the remarks concerned investors offer regarding Zulu. Your insults against the company and its investors is markedly clear, and remain unappreciated. In my opinion, you are a high-tech low-life individual with no other intention but to distort the quality of our investment. Personally, I don't like what you are doing.