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 : TSIS: WHAT IS GOING ON? -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Breeze1 who wrote (4836)	12/16/1998 7:36:00 AM
From: gary g	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 6931

Folks, listen to John. It's as if you're getting good advice that you would pay for anywhere else. Some of your questions can't be answered until such time as a law suit is brought by either an individual investor or an institution like the SEC or a Canadian regulatory body. We have no idea what the depths of this is. The only thing that I can ascertain from reading the financials is that they tried to play a game with the people that were shorting the stock and they got burned. Some of you asked if this was a mistake of management. The answer, of course, is of course. They obviously were unaware or blatantly disregarded the law. I've told everyone this before and I'll say it but one more time. If it wasn't for those of us that short stocks, you would not have a market to trade in, and those that don't understand this should go buy a book and read up on shorting stocks. Like John, I haven't the vaguest idea how this is going to turn out, but I do know that this co. is going to live with it for a long period of time. And to suggest that it was a stupid mistake on management's part is being charitable. If you want some more advice you're not paying for, here it comes: Invest in or trade the stock as you would have at any other time. This little episode may just bring this co. to the attention of other investors. And all could profit from it. I know that's a reach, but it's possible. God job, John. Were you a teacher in your past life?

To: Breeze1 who wrote (4836)	12/16/1998 8:54:00 AM
From: John S. Baker	Respond to of 6931

I agree with you completely ... that once this painful episode occurred, we are all better off getting it out into the open and clearing it up. Don gets a "plus" for making sure it comes out in its gross entirety. But the credibility of management, and hence of TSIS as an investment medium, will depend greatly upon how well he explains the remaining unanswered questions ... send those FAXes to JJ, folks ... and on how well he convinces the investing community that every possibility that this could recur has been shut tight. For myself, that is how I will be judging the next few days. JSb.

To: Breeze1 who wrote (4836)	12/21/1998 8:50:00 PM
From: John S. Baker	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 6931

This message is intended for "All" on the SI thread. Now that the AGM is behind us, I need to make a public apology to Breeze1 for events which go back maybe as much as four to six months. For the longest of time, I harangued him because he showed no evidence of doing any Due Diligence on his own. I complained publicly that he never would contact the company to get answers for himself, and seemed to delight in what I considered to be "bringing up old Shtuff over and over again." Clearly others on the thread noticed this, too, because at least one thread member remarked with surprise a few months back, "Surprise, Breeze and JSb agree" ... or words to that effect. Well, folks, turns out that Breeze had done at least one piece of Due Diligence on TSIS much better than I had. And it was a critical piece. With the benefit of his research, several of us, acting pretty much behind the scenes, were able to trigger some pretty necessary changes within the company in a deliberate, step-by-step fashion. Had the Due Diligence suddenly been discovered, then I am not sure that management would have been granted the time to put things straight in an orderly fashion and am quite confident that all of us would have ended up suddenly losing a lot of our investment in TSIS. I think it is unimportant to announce publicly the precise nature of the Due Diligence Breeze discovered, except to state that I am now comfortable that, in the general scheme of things, it is now "old news" (having been satisfactorily addressed in the "Notes" to the financials) and no longer represents a big danger to the value of our shares. So ... my public apology to Breeze1, who did his Due Diligence better'n I did! Nicely done, Breeze. I look forward to working with you again some day. JSb.