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 : BNEZ and PMA; Success in 1999 -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: BigDaddyMac who wrote (1437)	1/7/1999 5:05:00 PM
From: Elio Madama	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 2648

Mitchell, I have question for you also. Let's say MM's were selling NAKED SHORT shares for one year. Manipulating the price UP and DOWN and making a small fortune. Let's said they also took advantage of the fact that BNEZ it's not a reporting company. After we started asking certificates the MM's issued some of them, but not all because they have no shares. To get them, they have to buy on the open market. That will be very expensive because they will have to pay a lot of money. So how about if BNEZ helped the MM's TO COVER AN ILEGAL SHORT NAKED POSITION? BY ISSUED NEW SHARES/ If they did that BNEZ and MM's are braking the law. AND THE VICTIMS ARE INVESTORS WHO BOUGHT SHARES OF A VERY MANIPULADED COMPANY. HOW TO FIND THE TRUE? BY HALTING TRADE AND MAKING AN INVESTIGATION. Also by civil lawsuit against BNEZ. AGAIN NOT ILEGAL TO ISSUE NEW SHARES AND SELL IN THE OPEN MARKET IF THINGS ARE DONE AS THE LAW SAY. A CRIME IF BNEZ IS HELPING MM'S TO COVER NAKED SHORT.....IF WE HAVE ONE. I know we going to finish this problem in Court with A CLASS ACTION AGAINST BENEZ and a LEGAL INVESTIGATION AGAINST MM'S MANIPULATION. Elio

To: BigDaddyMac who wrote (1437)	1/7/1999 6:16:00 PM
From: Elio Madama	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 2648

Mitchell, once more to make clear. Did we have a naked position with BNEZ? Did that illegal position was 2.500.000 shares? Did BNEZ issued 2.500.000 shares to help MM's to cover such position? Do MM's have now all the shares they need to send out the certificates? and even more? Is AOL fault? jajajajajajajajaja. Is Elio fault? jajajajajajajajaja. Is Mitchell fault? jajajajajajaja. Name to me any other company with 2.500.000 shares (float), an Investor buying 500.000 shares and the price going down? JUST ONE. BNEZ and only BNEZ. Mitchell, it does not matter how much you try to scare me. It won't work. We have many thing which could be legal, but we also have many which could be not legal. If BNEZ was able to take to Court AOL, what make you think few shareholders can not take BNEZ to Court also? What you don't know is about ALL THE PEOPLE WHO PM TO ME AND WANT A CLASS ACTION LAWSUIT AGAINST BNEZ. Elio