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 : PanAmerican BanCorp (PABN) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: ColleenB who wrote (27556)	3/2/1999 8:29:00 PM
From: Scottey	Respond to of 43774

I think the person is saying - You and Jhild are bad to the bone bashers.

To: ColleenB who wrote (27556)	3/2/1999 8:30:00 PM
From: jhild	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 43774

The conclusions of this rambling tome are somewhat revealing: 1. Corporations are not legally allowed to screw over their shareholders. Period. There are legal remedies available. They are time consuming and expensive sometimes, and they definately require learning a lot of FACTS, but they are there. Companies that screw shareholders are breaking the law. If they do, they are hard to prosecute, but it is possible? There's a real insight. No wonder the guy is afraid to come over to SI. (He claims to have taken theology classes. Evidently the courses were neither in ethics or logic.) 2. Any suggestion that corporations are allowed to legally screw over their shareholders is a lie and a deception purposly posted to mislead shareholders and potential investors (for the reasons I posted earlier today). Any one that says a company can legally screw shareholders is lying for their own purposes. (Though if they say they are doing the illegal kind of screwing, that would not be covered here. But wait, any screwing is illegal according to posit #1, so this posit is a non statement.) 3. PRWT is a Delaware corporation, so all of this is moot. Since it is moot, one wonders: Why in the world the gestapo basher elites would continually bring it up? One posits an answer: Because they don't have anything that is pertinent to discuss regarding the company in the first place. PRWT is a Delaware corp, but the company has explained at the meeting that they are going to exchange PRWT shares "one for one" for shares of PanAm Bancorp (which last I looked was indeed a Nevada corp.) Oh, to have the company just file their financials to put some specificity into their statements. Why does it take nine months to accomplish this reverse merger? <Moderator> RE:NAME CHANGE: one share of PRWT will equal one share of PanAmerican. You will be notified of the change.

To: ColleenB who wrote (27556)	3/3/1999 4:27:00 AM
From: faqsnlojiks	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 43774

errrr, excuse me but..... could you read this post and tell me if this person actually said anything.. TIA ragingbull.com; Hi Colleen...well, to start off with, I'm curious as to why you direct this to me. Do you think that I'm PCModem??? I'm not. As to your question, the posting by this person is pretty convoluted until you get to the three "bottom-line" points. I agree with his primary point in that companies are not supposed to "screw-over" shareholders. Unfortunately, this is often irrelevant though because companies do it all the time (and often get away with it). In my opinion, it's not happening here. So why did you direct this question to me? Just curious.