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 : PLFM - Undervalued with great potential -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Bruce A. Thompson who wrote (7289)	3/8/1999 1:35:00 PM
From: Carl Jackson	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 9096

A little question on these TU-160's. Admittedly 20M was a good deal to purchase these aircraft when compared to their original cost and assuming that they were capable of performing their original mission of bombing NATO countries. However, since PLFM has made no announcements (yet) indicating a "strategic alliance in support of on-call interdiction missions" has anyone considered the on-going cost of maintaining these aircraft, even if they are not currently being flown? What about the cost to bring these three aircraft into a readiness state that would allow them to be flown, and again I am assuming that they are not currently capable of flying anywhere (much less of hurtling low orbital satellites into space or bouncing cell phone signals off their payload). Are there sufficient spare parts to maintain readiness and under whose control are these spare parts? Who exactly is currently maintaining them and how long does the contract last? Ask Uncle Sam, the maintenance costs of military aircraft is considerable. And add to that the often poor quality of some Soviet equipment and you may find that 20M was not such a good deal. By the way, other than forward looking statements, has there been any firm commitment from anyone that indicates a valid use for these aircraft? Not knocking Howard or PLFM, just asking

To: Bruce A. Thompson who wrote (7289)	3/8/1999 3:15:00 PM
From: cliff emohs	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 9096

I do not think I am reading anything wrong. The only thing I am not reading is a PR from Howard giving us some solid facts. From all I read on the TU-160 this weekend, is that they are going to be a lot of trouble and will take a lot of money to get the delivery system going. I brought into this company cause of the ARC system, and I would be a lot happier if Howard would focus his attention on getting that going. Sick of forward looking statements.