To: aleta who wrote (1146 ) 2/21/1999 6:54:00 PM From: PartyTime Read Replies (2) | Respond to of 2003
I don't know who likes to bicker more, you or JT. But, in any event, my response: >>>I know it will come as no surprise that I disagree with you that ESVS needs ZULU. Maybe they did in March of last year, but I don't think that is the case any longer.<<< Well, Aleta, I guess you're forgetting that ZULU is a significant part of the ESVS appeal for Nasdaq relisting. ESVS got dropped due to a technicality concerning the ZULU/ESVS stock swap, a specific technicality which they are appealing. Read the SEC filing. >>>There has been too much bad publicity about ZULU and strictly speaking, as a current non-investor who is familiar with both these companies, I would consider ESVS as a long term investment, even though it is on the pink sheets, if it were not involved with ZULU. I think ZULU unfortunately is carrying too much baggage and the market is showing that it feels much as I do by the price of these internet related stocks.<<< First off, I note your own past contributions towards Zulu's so-called "bad publicity," a contribution from you which apparently remains intact. Any company, particularly a new one, attempting to unite a half-a-dozen or more companies under one umbrella is obviously going to experience "baggage" issues. Indeed, it's a most unpleasant condition when merger and consolidation causes folks lose jobs, and the SIMer situation was a particularly ugly one given SIM's founders and other executives were well-connected throughout a cutthroat advertising industry (hello Wired!). Is it any wonder Zulu got painted with a negative image? Frankly, I call it "sabotage" and not "bad publicity." >>>ZULU could have been salvaged last year if, after those articles in Wired, PH had come forward to respond. That's all water under the bridge now and too late to do anything about now, IMO. I think ESVS can be salvaged and move forward with a good business plan, but only if they severe the ties with ZULU. This is JMO.<<< Aleta, contrary to your assertion you "know both companies," you are not the expert in this matter. Don't tell me Zulu "could have been salvaged." Pat Hayton, according to my own conversation with him, knew Wired was about to be sold and that its criticism of Zulu was part of outgoing Wired Publisher Rosetti's friendship with SIMer Zulu-disenfranchised executive Andy Batkin. The fact is, according to what Hayton told me, is that Hayton viewed Conde Naste, the then-buyer of Wired (it's since been sold again), as a potential client, "so why sue?" he said Now, Aleta, if you weren't back then so busy calling the Hayton I met an "imposter," you might have gained some value from my report of my communication with him. But no, you were too busy--as you appear now--attempting to manipulate negative Zulu opinion. So, Aleta, it's my belief you are talking out of your hat, guided by your own pre-suppositions however motivated and that your comments are not based on any credible information or even any new information which you possess. In fact, you'll eventually find 'old-hat' anti-Zulu arguments will become passe. And I, for one, can't wait for that moment! Just out of curiosity, since you've stated a disinterest in Zulu for some time now, how come you haven't posted anywhere else on SI? Is this a hint that Zulu is still your 'darling' and that there are no other stocks out there worthy of your participation?