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: BlueFox who wrote (16291)	11/27/1998 4:43:00 PM
From: PartyTime	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 18444

Good questions, BlueFox. Regarding the ex-SIMer thing. Maybe their role will become less antagonistic. One would think they'd have to come on board, or at least become supportive at some point, if they'd expect to get anything at all from their Zulu holdings? It seems only practical for them to block Zulu's efforts if they have a realistic shot at getting "SIM" back; or they know they could obtain a large settlement due to the very threat of legal action; or if they've used their actions to obtain concessions from Zulu. In order to actually get the company back, they'd have to sue successfully against Softbank Holding Company. Such a suit could take two to four years. And even then, if successful, they'd have to go back to the courts in order to get Zulu's "SIM" component or settle with Zulu for very big money, depending on what happened to Zulu by that time. Given that long, drawn-out process, is it possible that the ex-SIMers have made (or are presently making) alliances with other large shareholders for a renewed or rejuvenated Zulu, (with or without ESVS?)? That their past action(s) have only been to show muscle, in order to better position themselves strategically and that this could explain the antagonism and failure regarding ESVS/ZULU bid for Nasdaq. With a new executive management team (the Disney connections, etc.), coupled with some other deals ex-SIMers may now see in the wind, would the growth of the company be more palatable for them now? That they only kept the legal option open in the event Zulu struck it big during its first year of operation. I guess what supports the theory is that if Zulu had, in fact, spiked bigtime like other Internet stocks, by having the lawsuit against SHC-Japan and a threat of one over Zulu-tek, perhaps the ex-SIMers reasoned they had an option to settle for bigger bucks without going through a lengthy two-to-four-year civil trial process, and plus they'd still keep their Zulu stock holdings, this coupled with a slim, longshot possibility of getting the company back. But Zulu didn't spike and the ex-SIMers now know SHC-Japan, it seems, is playing hardball with 'em every step of the way. So I'd think the ex-SIMER options would have to change, thus becoming more supportive towards Zulu's intentions, especially if the ex-SIMers were successful with obtaining concessions from Zulu by showing they could be a force in knocking down the Nasdaq deal. You're right, BlueFox, the ex-SIMers simply can't go on as a negative factor against Zulu. And when they were so, I surmise it was due to them seeking a strategic advantage of some kind, or for leverage in their existing SHC-Japan lawsuit or threats of a lawsuit against Zulu-tek. Given this speculation, is it possible today that the ex-SIMers are now ready to work positively in order to see their shares in Zulu grow. Could they, instead of being a once negative force, perhaps today a moot force, actually become a positive force for Zulu down the road? As always, just thinking out loud. Comments appreciated.