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 (30669)	4/1/1999 7:53:00 PM
From: barbara sperino	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 43774

Now Colleen The acquisiton is complete but there are always stipulation in any contract. If you had read the there was OBLIGATION ON BOTH parties the must be met over a period of the next three years. Well not meeting those obligations would void the contract. What you are say that there was no contract. EXAMPLE: Man signs a contract with a major network to do a sit-com. So man now is promised he will receive a zillion dollars for doing the sit-com. Now also in this contract it states that the man has to show up for work on time and always be available for doing ,lets say, 10 promotion tv spots a year. also there is a small clause at the bottom of this contract which is called a Morals clause. Now Man misses work, is never available for promotions, and the netwrok finds out he was a major porn star and never mention this at the time of signing the contract. Does man still gets his Zillion dollars? Was there ever a contract? Lets take a marriage contract. One party promises to love, honor and support. Other party promises the same. One breaks this promise. Other party sue for divorse which is just another way of saying the are now canceling the origional contract because the two parties did not live up to their part of the contract.

To: ColleenB who wrote (30669)	4/2/1999 3:56:00 PM
From: Howard C.	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 43774

Colleen, I think you responded to Barbara in a perfectly logical and pursuasive manner. I've been off the thread a few days, and now I see there are credibility problems. I was busy "helping" the SEC gather information on another company whose news releases don't seem to have been quite up to standards, shall we say. I find Barbara to be consistently arrogant and always defending the company no matter what, similarly to others on other threads when faced with valid questions. We here can not know if such ramblings are true convictions or whether there are other motivations. If the former, that's freedom of speech and I defend it, if the latter, then the SEC should nail them. IMO.