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: osvaldo diaz-christians who wrote (15579)	11/11/1998 12:51:00 PM
From: PartyTime	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 18444

Hmmmm. >>>3) ESVS is being bought by ZULU insiders who don't have to register with the SEC. Reason, the know something we don't. If they buy Zulu , the have to register.<<< Now there's an interesting statement. It goes back to when we were all angry to discover we'd only be getting a 10 to one. Remember, we always thought Zulu had the money and would therefore be the controlling entity and we considered Zulu holders would do better than ESVS holders? So you're saying only the Zulu insiders are buying ESVS, but not until after ESVS absorbs all of Zulu's shareholders; and then the whole kit and kabottle will be sold to some multinational, like (this is a guess) back to Softbank Holding Company-Japan? Or something like that? How do the Zulu insiders take control of ESVS? Or have they already, and thus are using Zulu as a smokescreen to accumulate debt, absorb the confusion and otherwise keep ESVS' secret intentions intact? A lot to think about here. One thing I do know. It's not as simple as Jon Tara's insistence that this is all a matter of an unpaid Zulu bill. Did you ever stop to think, Jon, that they might want the appearance of unpaid Zulu bills? Again, it'd be like taking a step backwards in order to take three or four steps forwards, while leaving the ex-SIMers shaking their heads.

To: osvaldo diaz-christians who wrote (15579)	11/11/1998 6:22:00 PM
From: kemosabe	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 18444

I'm curious. If Piedmont Consulting (PR) is contacting brokers and analysts, and they in turn are supposedly making recommendations to their clients, why is it that very little new information is making its way back to us? If they have a story to release to the broker/analysts, why can't they release it to the public via PRs? It seems that bad blood and distrust are again starting to emerge on the conversion issue (not that it ever left). So where is Sitrick? kemosabe