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: PartyTime who wrote (17377)	12/29/1998 12:38:00 AM
From: Jon Tara	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 18444

PartyTime, I have no intention of harping about the questions not being answered if they are not. First of all, I realize - and acknowleged in the cover letter - that it may not be possible (because it would not be legal) for all of the questions to be answered, because a company cannot share material facts with only a select group of shareholders. Despite the power of online discussion, disclosure on an online group does not satisfy legal requirements. However, I hope that the company will be forthcoming with much of this information in the form of official shareholder communication. They will certainly be aware of what questions are being asked. The submission of the questions could not have been more fair. I passed-on each and every one of the questions that were asked. The alternative that you favored involved you passing judgement on the questions, and choosing which questions would be passed-on and which would not. The questions asked were all reasonable, certainly worth asking, and were respectfully worded after much effort and cooperation on the part of many people. I think they come awfully close to expressing all of the questions that we have all had about this company. If nothing else, the questions are a valuable resource for the company. They now have a pretty good idea what questions are in the minds of shareholders. I should think that would be of tremendous benefit to the company in it's effort at better shareholder communication. If you had your way, of course, all they would know as a result of this effort is what YOUR concerns are. Let me ask you this, PT: would you be happy or unhappy if the company were to answer all of the questions with positive answers that put to rest shareholder uneasiness? You'd be happy - admit it. Now, wouldn't you be happier if that happens than you would be if the questions had never been asked? And wouldn't you be happier if they are able to positively answer ALL of the questions - even the tough ones? Wouldn't that be a better outcome than having them answer only easy questions that you have pre-selected to avoid any unpleasant outcome? Well, that could certainly happen. The ball is in Pat Hayton's court. It's his to play as he wishes. I sincerely hope that he and the company are once-and-for-all able to clarify all of these issues to everyone's satisfaction.

To: PartyTime who wrote (17377)	12/29/1998 5:10:00 AM
From: Brady B.	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 18444

PT: Why can't they just answer these questions. It doesn't and shouldn't matter who submits them. These are all legitimate questions. As for people putting their names and addresses on them, that's the cardinal sin of the Internet. What is so tough about answering a few simple questions. Why does it have to be drug out and made into such a big deal concerning the bearer of the questions? Believe me, it crossed my mind to go ahead and send them. It crossed other's minds too. It seems like you don't want the questions to go through unless you send them personally. We could care less if our names our affiliated with the questions. We_just_want_the_answers. bb