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: Curtains who wrote (14536)	10/3/1998 9:32:00 AM
From: Terry T.	Respond to of 18444

There is a concept of "de facto"officer or director, exposing one to same liability as officer or director in name. A controlling shareholder is also liable for actions harmful to a company. Despite comments about Hayton being out of the picture, via NetVest and later China International, he has orchestrated this charade. Too many comments by too many people, complaining about how Hayton has made life miserable, suggest Hayton has had a dominant role.

To: Curtains who wrote (14536)	10/3/1998 9:46:00 AM
From: Brady B.	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 18444

The only agenda I have is to make money and to state my opinion. My opinion is based on what I feel has been demonstrated to us by the company and also by public records that show truth in what has transpired in an individuals life. As far as Hayton being a Director. So what? It has been stated more than once by ex-employees that he is in control. Don't tell me that ex-employees have a vendetta against Hayton. These employees left at different times under different conditions. To insinuate that they all hate or have something against Hayton only gives power to my theory. Back to my agenda, are you saying that when I find something that could be taken as bad concerning the company, ie the Asian Group selling 2,000,000 shares, I should keep it to myself? Usually when I discover something I post a link or copy and paste it to the board with little or no comment. I try to allow the reader to make their own conclusion. Where were you and why weren't you complaining when I was posting the good stuff? bb

To: Curtains who wrote (14536)	10/3/1998 10:05:00 AM
From: Brady B.	Respond to of 18444

Curtains, please answer these questions for everyone...... 1) Who is in charge at ZULU? 2) Who is in charge at ESVS? 3) Why haven't investors been kept informed better than they have? 4) Why weren't the financials released in March as promised? April? May? etc? 5) Why have revenues dropped from the reported figures for 1997 to the reported figures for 1998? 6) Who is China Equities? 7) Why can't anyone find information concerning China Equities? 8) Who is the Asian group (forgot the name) that proposed to sell or sold 2,000,000 shares in August? 9) Why have there been so many PR/IR firms over the last year? 10) If Hayton is not in charge, why did Mark Wachs say that Hayton had to okay the PR's? Ten is a good number to stop at and if you truly try to find the answers that will keep you busy for a while. It's kept us busy for almost a year now. These are simple questions and should have simple answers. I look forward to your findings as I will, based upon your answer sources, reevaluate my current position. Like I said before, I am in it for the money. If you can prove to me that ZULU will make me money I'm back in. Simple as that. bb

To: Curtains who wrote (14536)	10/3/1998 10:25:00 AM
From: Terry T.	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 18444

We have good reason to be concerned, and to question everything about this company. My biggest concerns remain as follows: 1. Is Wired story correct, referring to lawsuit by ex-SIM Colvin, that Hayton diverted sums of Zulumedia money into his other business interests? Per Wired, Colvin's lawsit makes this allegation, but I have not been able to catch up with him, and his attorney in NYC won't give me his phone number or discuss facts with me. I would like to find out what they know, because if true, why has someone not followed up, or even the SEC followed up? The lack of follow through on something so outrageous makes one wonder whether report is inaccurate. 2. What did ZULU get for issuing $12mm preferred D on 3/4/98,which was used by NetVest in the NetVest/ESVS stock swap on 3/6/98 to get 1mm preferred in ESVS worth 5.55 mm shares of ESVS common? Was this a sham transaction (enriching Hayton with a controlling interest in ESVS at the expense of Zulu) or was real value paid into ZULU at that time? Was other debt cancelled or rolled into this stock issuance? Should be easy question to answer, but I can't get details from company. Hm............. 3. No one can tell me who Keith Montgomery is, or how to reach him. Sec. of State lists him as Pres. of Zulu, and he signed 9/8/98 reorganization plan, but a receptionist at ZULU had never heard of him. While there are many new and different employees, would not the president of the company be on a receptionist's telephone list? Paul Messina told me he (Montgomery) is not officer or director of Zulu. I even tracked a person with that name down in LA and left a message to call in August, but that number has since been disconnected. 4. Zulu was administratively dissolved 7/98, for failure to file annual report. This is really a minor, administrative matter, although highly embarrassing for any active company. I tried for almost 3 weeks in August (with multiple phone calls to LA) to get reinstatement petition filed, or verify it was being filed. It was, finally, by end of August, but the filing listed Montgomery and Messina as directors, and Montgomery, Walker and Messina as officers. Messina told me, flat out, shortly after this 8/25 filing that it was in error, that he (Messina) was neither an officer nor a direct, that Neil Miller was only director, and that Mincheff and Bob Smith were the officers of Zulu-tek. Now, we see Montgomery's name crop up again, this time on 9/8 reorganization plan. So what in the hell is going on? Is Montgomery a real person, or is someone using a fictitious person and name to "serve" as Zulu's top officer? 5. If Utah filing was wrong, and Messina is aware of fact he is improperly listed as officer and director, and the entire list of officers and directors is WRONG, why hasn't it been corrected or amended in last month? I called Utah on 10/1, and no one has bothered to file a correction to 8/25 annual report. The 8/25/98 filing was under oath. I have requested a copy from Utah to see who signed (the allegedly inaccurate information) on behalf of the company . All of this information is provided here for "whomever" can help me, or wishes more detail.