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 : DGIV-A-HOLICS...FAMILY CHIT CHAT ONLY!! -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Howard C. who wrote (33390)	12/9/1998 4:42:00 PM
From: Zack Lyon	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 50264

As far as the last news out of Digitcom Y2K issues, THEY don't even consider it mindblowing news either. Just informative. Why if they did, then would it not be on their website? It is not there now. Or you might say. They are drinking beer and laughing at us right now. Come on Howard, you and I are in the same boat. If you don't like the way things are going sell. I'm buyin'. Have a great day.

To: Howard C. who wrote (33390)	12/9/1998 4:58:00 PM
From: ~digs	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 50264

hey howard, correct me if I'm wrong, but I don't think that it would be illegal for Jimmy himself to buy shares right now on the open market (although he has plenty already). Let's say for instance, that said contracts or funding were in a finalization stage (maybe they're being translated as bull suggested... who know's... I'm sure there's lots of minor details involved in such a signing) Let's also assume that Jimmy is of course aware of how close the completion of such acts are, and that, in his mind, substantial news is a gimme once everything is all taken care of. Would it then be illegal for Mr. Chin to take some of his own pocket change and pick up some more cheap shares? Furthermore, would it be illegal for a company's board of directors to be doing "insider" buying? Anyone know the answer to these questions? I personally don't think that Digitcom has been buying shares... maybe, I'm not sure. I don't think they were buying past a $1.50 if in fact they were doing any buying at all. I'm sure they new that the substantial news was not due out yet, and that a 200% gain could not be supported without it. After we fell today, we did see some buying come in around midday. Maybe it was them... maybe it was individual shorters covering. One thing I do know is that if Digitcom is buying shares, it would probably have a semi-decent effect on the share price if they announced publicly that they we're doing so. A share buy back by company officials would indeed be a positive sign. If they are buying, they should announce their actions soon before they are done doing so. I don't know much about all this... just thinking aloud... Dave

To: Howard C. who wrote (33390)	12/9/1998 5:25:00 PM
From: Lazarus Long	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 50264

Actually Howard, I disagree... Furthermore, it is their moral obligation at this point to go public on these things and help shore up the value. It is quite common for companies to time the release of news rather than release it immediately. I know the company I work for often holds news to coincide with a show or other event... The moral aspects of such a decision makes for an interesting debate. Is the company morally obligated to try to influence the stock price over the short term or manage the company to enhance long term share holder value or be oblivious to either of these considerations? As far as I can see, all those positions have merit, but I believe that managing a company to maximize long term share holder value is the current favorite though share holders often pressure companies to maximize value over the short term. As a matter of fact, that particular question reaches into the very marrow of how companies are run, including corporate goals, corporate structure and executive compensation. Just my opinion, Lazarus