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 : PINC - Planet City -- Software and Services -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Bill Ulrich who wrote (916)	11/12/1998 4:55:00 PM
From: ztect	Respond to of 1754

Bill: I admit when I'm wrong. You are right. $9.00 like I said was very high and as you correctly point out "absurd". Having read many threads and articles on y2K, hyperbola and sensational are synonymous with the whole conversation. Covering one's butt legally seems to be as big an issue as the y2K problem itself. Some people say that it will be a problem with catastrophic proportions, others say it's a hoax. Those who say it huge seem to selling fixes. Those who say it's a hoax seem to be shorting y2K stocks. (Just read the TAVA thread). So I personally take the whole larger conversation with a grain of salt. Would be interesting to contact the analyst who wrote the report and ask him what his basis was. Surprised my diligent buddies joe and jeff haven't already done so. Anyway as you may note, I have neither pumped or dumped this stock. I certainly haven't told anyone to buy it. I have merely wondered why anyone would so vehemently deride the company without even knowing who the CEO was and without any interest in contacting the company. Most of the insinuations so far seem to be without basis other than perceived "red flags", and don't take too much to rebuke. Like I said before in a previous post, I don't know whether these self anointed "cyber vigilantes" are part of the problem or part of the solution. Furthermore stating that there is competition for a specific product is pointless if you haven't determined how big the market is, how much market share is necessary to generate revenues, and how effective is the company's marketing and sales efforts. If the market is significant, then even 2 to 3% of the market can be profitable. Anyway if hypsters predominated the conversation on this thread as they have in the past, I'd have to question them as well. For purposes of full disclosure I will state that I have a small position in this company that I will trade out of when my target is reached. If the company's E-Commerce product is worthwhile I may up my target. Other than this small financial interest in this company, like I also said before, I'm amused by these "cyber vigilantes" and diligently record their antics for posterity and some of my "friends". z

To: Bill Ulrich who wrote (916)	11/12/1998 5:30:00 PM
From: ztect	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 1754

Bill: Just one further point of clarification after a little further review..... The analyst report states, "The current amount that can be charged for remediating one line of code can be as high as $9.00 per line..." which is actually true, even if this is the extreme high end for very difficult code and far from the average cost for LOC which is much less. Therefore Joe's point seems then to be more one of semantics, since the analyst didn't say that the cost of remediating code is $9.00. Joe though seems to imply that this was what was stated. Geeze that Joey is a real slippery one. Cheers?, z