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 (14125)	9/17/1998 12:49:00 AM
From: Fredman	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 18444

Jon - you lost me on your 'fishing'. Were you explaining to common-folk how to make money in the stock market with 'Companies' being the 'fish', or were you referring to how some CEO's say and do all kinds of things to Bilk people out of a lot of money by getting them to invest in bogus companies, with the 'fish' being the 'Investors' ??

To: Jon Tara who wrote (14125)	9/17/1998 3:18:00 AM
From: PartyTime	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 18444

Jon, did I understand you to write that ESVS doesn't yet have enough market makers? How many would be sufficient? Aren't there also many Nasdaq companies who have but a few market markers, some with one or two? Now a couple of real mover market makers, Jon? Now you're talking, that would be nice. This funk could be better. It will. Regarding the warrant structure, its' a fine investment so long as the expiration date of them gives manuverability room. Warrants with an expiration of 2002 would be ideal. Since they trade as common shares until expiration, and can be bought cheaply, if the company has good prospects these warrants would dovetail at good profit, and with investors holding greater shares. They also help to attract interest to the company. In my view, warrants would not necessarily be a bad thing at all; but rather could be good.