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 : Amazon Natural (AZNT) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Spider Valdez who wrote (12983)	11/23/1998 2:17:00 PM
From: Janice Shell	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 26163

remember janice go on & on how dtc is just like bank . she say dtc does not care about aznts stock. yet dtc hires lawyers so they can fight lifting freeze. how can they fight this? stock is not registered to dtc. court demand return of this stock. Y'know, you're sorta like an arachnid version of Chatty Cathy: pull the string and you say one of the same five or six things. 1. Actually it's Mike Sylver who, at the injunction hearing, went on and on comparing the DTC to a bank. 2. The DTC has no financial interest in AZNT stock. 3. I gather from the court transcript--you remember, the part where McClean says he's spoken with DTC counse--that the DTC disapproves of AZNT's efforts to provoke a short squeeze. It is clear from the transcript that the DTC has imposed certain conditions which it insists be met before it will turn the stock over to the custody of the court. The DTC operates according to statutory regulations that are somewhat more rigorous than those of a Nevada BB company. 4. Mike Sylver insists that the stock in question isn't free-trading. I daresay the DTC begs to differ. And after all, Mike himself released at least 2 million shares of it. I really don't think there's ANY way he'll get around that one. 5. The Court has NOT ordered that any stock be returned. How many times do I have to tell you this? Can't you read and understand a simple two-paragraph injunction?