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: Jon Tara who wrote (16271)	11/27/1998 1:49:00 AM
From: PartyTime	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 18444

Random Thoughts: Speculatively Good and Speculatively Bad Even though there is an escape clause in the wording of the SEC filing, I have a feeling they're going to continue with the merger anyway. This is because, practically speaking, they've been operating as one company. It also appears as if the boards of directors of both companies have also been functioning as one--so how they gonna split their identities, never mind the tangible and intangible assets? So if ESVS caves to near Zulu levels or more traditional OTC levels, and the merger continues, what happens to the 10 to one ratio? I don't recall any wording for an escape from the 10 to one. So is there a likelihood Zulu will hover around .10 and ESVS will fall to $1 at or near the time of the merger? Would this help placate the deal? Have not some big-time (non-institutional) investors already invested heavily into both companies? Therefore won't they want the merger still to happen to keep the plan intact? I think, more than anything, they'll want the two entities to become one (perhaps in concert with another), and then take the battle on from there, under a new CEO and COO. Nasdaq would have been nice, but according to Bob Smith, in the PR, it seems they're gonna move foward anyway on the OTC market. Now, an IPO is a very expensive way to get onto Nasdaq. How expensive is it for listing by failing and then having to try again and again? Could this mean Nasdaq suddenly isn't, at this time, important anymore? Are there other companies to rally on the OTC level in order to present a bigger fish downstream to Nasdaq or AMEX even? Which leads me to the million dollar question: What if there's a bigger merger in the mill (perhaps the rumored online shopping deal), one which would gobble up both ESVS and Zulu? Would the ESVS Nasdaq listing then become moot? It's my bet that Mr. Chmiel came on board for a reason and that this reason had nothing to do with what just recently happened relative to the delisting. Both Disney and AOL Digital City have been tapped for executive leadership in this venture--and a bigger fish for CEO is about to become announced (another big name?). This tells me they're not just simply baking a small potato. But on the other hand, at another angle of perspective, the delisting certainly could be a possible explanation for why eCommerce Corp went the way it did. Is the cookie crumbling? Could be, but I don't think so. Me? I'll continue to take a positive view and not be deterred by some negative setbacks. Obstacles will come and obstacles will go. If something bad happened, it's my belief that the company will become better because of it. This company has a lot of investors, some of whom are pretty big. No one (except perhaps the ex-SIMer contingent) wants it to go away. So I'm staying put and maintaining my long position.