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: risk-averse who wrote (36342)	1/16/1999 12:18:00 PM
From: bullmarket	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 50264

very good point, risk. we can see that the fundamentals are changing for DGIV and that a base is forming, a base which has been increasing as more contract news have come out lately. It is nice to know that Teltek, which has access to DGIV business records, which has the necessary licenses to do business in China, and which could have chosen any IP telephony company to be its partner (name me a company that would turn down China????), has chosen DGIV and furthermore, has decided that 1.5 dollar/DGIV share represents a great deal! One can only imagine what teltek thinks is a "fair " value for DGIV once more contracts are announced (which, as we are "reading between the lines", may be coming soon) <gggg>.

To: risk-averse who wrote (36342)	1/16/1999 12:38:00 PM
From: Lazarus Long	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 50264

Actually, I have to disagree... I don't think that the set price of $1.50 necessarily means that Teltek thinks that price is cheap. Hopefully, Digitcom was able to negotiate a bit better deal and not have to "sweeten the pot" that much to make the agreement. In reality, each company brought at least 2 things to the table. Digitcom brings U.S. to China minutes and options to DGIV shares at $1.50. Teltek brings cash flow and the possibility of an ISP license in China. In aggregate, the companies must think that it is a fair exchange. However, to compare specific parts from each company as being equivalent is not founded, IMO. Lazarus