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.

Technology Stocks : TAVA Technologies (TAVA-NASDAQ) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Runner who wrote (27208)	1/29/1999 1:07:00 AM
From: PJr	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 31646

I also applaud the efforts (above and beyond) of our three spokespersons. Very proactive about your due diligence. I would respectfully ask one question. IF.... little change is recognizable within the next 3-6 months, would the convincing experience that you all obviously shared remain intact? Would it be just as convincing in a negative way that shareholder interest is not the high priority that you have been led to believe? I clearly hope that this is not the case, but could any of you concede that it is remotely possible that a convincing show was made due to the appearance of shareholder organization regarding the proxies? I'm not suggesting that this is the case, just curious to know whether or not there is even the least bit of apprehension on your part....devil's advocate on my part. I have never seen or heard of any undertaking quite like this. The three of you have done shareholders a great service and we are all appreciative. TAVA could not have accomplished the first in what we hope will be many PR coups for many of its investors by meeting you folks "voice to voice". Again, thanks for the super effort! As I re-read this, it sounds horribly cynical! I didn't intend it that way and I mean no disrespect as I have a long position in this stock. I guess I'm just stunned that such a dramatic turnaround can occur in 90 minutes when you all seemed convinced of months of shareholder neglect. Pat

To: Runner who wrote (27208)	1/29/1999 8:12:00 AM
From: tom hostile	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 31646

Runner, I agree. I have been with enough CEO's of much larger companies that unless I can look them in the eye wouldn't trust them any further than I could spit. Timing is everything and this new feel good-open policy is quite interesting. Also since I am in marketing- I hope all of you don't start complaining about cost of sales when the "National PR" firm's bills start coming in. Good!!! PR is not cheap or as some think free advertising. I do agree it is long past due- management's decision to not hype Y2K. So, now what is the real news? Since, I missed getting out before the drop, I"m still a few dollars down and hope the management team isn't playing the game as the votes where being registered over the phone or web.

To: Runner who wrote (27208)	1/29/1999 11:39:00 AM
From: JDN	Respond to of 31646

Dear Runner: No one hates dilution more than myself. I have harped on this subject since July 1997. However, the company needs the options to attract the kind of talent they need to further their aims in their CORE business. Anyone in this industry knows the game, stock options is what its all about. However, they are ONLY issuing Incentive Stock Options (the old Qualified Option type). That means that anyone receiving the options must hold them for at least 2 years to get capital gain treatment. Another point, there has been a rumor floating around that the Mangan transaction would be a pooling of interest. Frankly, management would have preferred that to avoid setting up good will. Well, because Mangan is spinning off some business of their own which TAVA doesnt want it cant be a pooling of interests. That suits me fine. That means, I believe, that it will be a cash and stock deal and not a pure stock deal. Result, less TAVA shares issued. Goodwill doesnt bother me as its a noncash expense on the income statement which gets added back in to cash flow anyhow and many analysts value a company based upon cash flow rather than income as its more easily comparable. As to how any of you vote, that is none of our business. The purpose of the CC was first to elicit information for the threads, and secondly to give Management an opinion as to how things looked from our side of the fence. I think that it was a complete success for both sides. JDN