SI
SI
discoversearch

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: antibash who wrote (13059)11/24/1998 3:20:00 AM
From: Bill Ulrich  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 26163
 
Wow Anti—here I am agreeing with you again—twice in the same night, even! You're 100% correct (“The shorts have a very big problem on their hands…”).

Those stupid shorters just don't realize the tax problems they'll have given more days like this one. I mean, you just can't do that and not expect to pay the piper sooner or later. That darn tax man—&#147here's one for you, nineteen for me&#148 to quote George Harrison (hey, is he related to those other famous Beatles, Spider Harrison and Ringo Staris?). A financially astute guy such as yourself knows what I mean, of course!



To: antibash who wrote (13059)11/24/1998 4:10:00 AM
From: Bill Ulrich  Respond to of 26163
 
Yeah I did for second: (“Did you ever think to yourself that maybe AZNT has a legal claim here?”) Then I realized the validity of AZNT's claim and odds of victory are about the same as Mikey Slyver being profiled on the cover of “Entreprenuer Inc.” magazine.

Smile!<click>
p.s. see you at $75 bux.

Yeeeahh Baaay-beee!!” - Austin Powers



To: antibash who wrote (13059)11/24/1998 8:19:00 AM
From: tonto  Respond to of 26163
 
Anti, if one takes out the Sylver factor in the court case, it would appear that the company has reason to move forward and hope for a positive judgement.

But, there remains the unknown factor, Sylver. We do know from the court transcripts that through the October 2nd hearing, the court has some troubles with his testimony. The judge made that very clear and must not be forgotten.

Judd's questioning of Sylver identified some holes in the story and I have a feeling he may be holding some good cards. That shall be determined in the future, and all any of us can do is "speculate" what the outcome shall be.

The transcript does provide us with some insight into some of the players, and none of them come across well. But, let us consider one single statement made by the CEO of AZNT and ask the following question; why did he say this?

"We manufacture pharmaceuticals"... Where does the company manufacture pharmaceuticals? (Sylver was under oath at the time)What pharmaceuticals does AZNT manufacture?



To: antibash who wrote (13059)11/24/1998 9:41:00 AM
From: Janice Shell  Respond to of 26163
 
If all were find and dandy with the illegal shorters, this would have been thrown out of court a long time ago!

Excuse me: it's only in Mike Sylver's mind--and yours--that the court case is about "illegal" shorting. What it's REALLY about is whether Andy Mann failed to pay for the 4 million shares given him by Mike Sylver, and failed to return the 480,000 shares that Titan and Gary Sylver lent him to short.

1 MR. QUALEY: Mr. Sylver can explain that.
2 THE WITNESS: Okay. First of all, remember, I said
3 previously there is approximately 2,700,000 or 2,872,000 shares
4 naked short of our stock out in the market.
5 Through all the broker dealers, we know how many brokers
6 have shorted exactly what amount of stock and the dates of the
7 short, the amount of the shorts. We have narrowed it down to
8 the individual brokers who committed the shorts.
9 We have devised a plan that is going to alleviate this
10 shorting and the shorting of all other stocks in this country.
11 It is going to change the face of shorting in the United States
12 and prevent this illegal wrongdoing by Canadian companies and
13 American companies, you know.

14 THE COURT: I don't care about that at all. I want to

15 deal with this case.


Quod erat demonstrandum.