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 : Amazon Natural (AZNT) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Level Head who wrote (17655)	1/30/1999 8:45:00 PM
From: marcos	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 26163

Bienvenidos, LH - good stuff, facts are nice. Do you have a transcript? eom

To: Level Head who wrote (17655)	1/30/1999 8:53:00 PM
From: Janice Shell	Respond to of 26163

Ah, as you read along you'll find that the age of the shares and the prescribed duration of the restrictions mean nothing at all to Self-Transfer Sylver. Quite seriously, he's trying to cancel practically all the 144 stock he ever issued. And if you haven't read his looney affidavit, don't miss it. It's really....special: exchange2000.com We've had a lotta fun with it, but still haven't entirely plumbed its depths. And the transcription of the 2 October injunction hearing is a hoot as well.

To: Level Head who wrote (17655)	1/31/1999 12:03:00 AM
From: DSPetry	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 26163

Level head, Not to be sceptical (But you did just join SI to post on this thread)... Do you have proof??? Federal Judge Heber issued an order on January 14th of 1999, in the form of a permanent injunction, requiring Amazon to immediately issue a new unrestricted certificate for the 224,000 shares of AZNT common stock. By the way, these shares were old, and the restriction had long since expired. The case, then, is indeed over, pending only Amazon's compliance with the federal judge's order. However, I have gathered from this thread that Amazon's track record on compliance is poor, so the next action would be (in the event of non-compliance), a contempt of court sanction, I would expect. Certainly the moving papers support that. And assuming this is true, why would you provide this info at this time??? Also, I would benefit should AZNT succeed as a company, but evidence suggests that this is not likely. I guess this world is really just full of people trying to save the innocent investor... It really is amazing.. Dave

To: Level Head who wrote (17655)	1/31/1999 1:13:00 AM
From: Spider Valdez	Read Replies (7) \| Respond to of 26163

".....Jeff's assertion, that the suit was brought by NexTech, is indeed correct. In fact, records show that Amazon did not even file a timely response, and when Amazon finally did file a response, it was after the allotted time period. The case was filed in November of 1998......" level head guy you are leaving out very important elements to this story. my understanding is nextech was brought into this by charlie same way andy mann was. it was tifer who threatened 2 ta's to lift legends off this stock before the restrictions had been met. you also fail to state this stock was 'voting only' & it had been transfered to his wife & i understand that is why she is named in the case. you also fail to mention motion aznt filed ; "motion to set aside". ".......Amazon did file a _later_ suit against Kricfalusi, his wife, and other unnamed entities, but it does not impact the execution of the court's order to Amazon. Federal Judge Heber issued an order on January 14th of 1999, in the form of a permanent injunction, requiring Amazon to immediately issue a new unrestricted certificate for the 224,000 shares of AZNT common stock. By the way, these shares were old, and the restriction had long since expired. The case, then, is indeed over, pending only Amazon's compliance with the federal judge's order. However, I have gathered from this thread that Amazon's track record on compliance is poor, so the next action would be (in the event of non-compliance), a contempt of court sanction, I would expect. Certainly the moving papers support that......" i assume you are refering to the motion to set aside as a "later suit". the restrictions had not been met. i believe the stock was 'voting only' status. i also understand that it was said the dates had been "typed" on the certs & the certs were being analyzed for authenticity. can you state here level head how you have come to the conclusion that amazon's record of "compliance" is "poor"? what was the relationship between charlie kris & tifer? what was there relationship to this "nextech"? what is your relation to charlie kris., tifer & nextech ? when you say the "case is over" you are not being honest. there is a motion to set aside .the moving papers simply brought the case to vegas. after tifer was able to get the stock in court from his "client" ( lololol !), he then had it moved to vegas because all attempts to lift the legends off the restricted stock by threatening 2 ta's had failed. you have a level head guy, you figure it out. you can see how good all this worked for andy mann, can't you? spider