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 : TSIG.com TIGI (formerly TSIG) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Tom who wrote (26584)	4/23/1999 4:05:00 PM
From: Ellen	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 44908

I'd like to add my thanks to Suzanne also. And also share my reply to a PM received from Swordsman. Just for the record. (And where it says "loan" should be corrected to revolving credit agreement) To: The Swordsman (who wrote...) From: Ellen Friday, Apr 23 1999 3:47PM ET Sword, IF - and I repeat, IF - I've been "swayed", as you call it, it wasn't because of posts by V$gas - or any other long, for that matter. It is your own posts that "turn me off." Rather than sounding like a seriously concerned investor, you sound like a combative trouble-maker. > Sword's comment snipped < See what I mean? First of all, it is NOT KNOWN he "hijacked" any shares. According to Marty - which is according to the attorneys he contacted - Gordon only owns about 14 million shares, currently. And didn't Marty say he got another attorney's opinion on that of the company's attorney? Also, according to the 10K, some of Gordon's shares are in a trust anyway. At least two people have, independently of each other, reported that the # of shares reported as beneficially owned by Gordon includes the # of those POSSIBLE for him to obtain and part of those would only be if the loan was used in full. My understanding of that loan is that it can only be used in blocks of $1 million and that NONE of it has currently been used. If additional and/or further monies comes from an outside source and/or investor, then Gordon's loan - and any shares he'd have received from it - becomes a moot point. If you think something is awry, do what Marty did. Corroborate or disprove what he says by going there yourself and ask for yourself to see the documents. It would accomplish the same thing, probably be cheaper (in total) than what you say you're trying to do now and it would be less disruptive. > Sword's comment snipped < I don't see that anyone is. These SAME questions were included in the list of questions from the thread. If you aren't yet satisfied with the answers, go seek what satisfies you. Report back to the thread if you can corroborate or disprove the information Marty brought back. In the meantime, it's counter-productive to post - and in such a combative way - accusation and supposition. There's nothing wrong with still having questions. So go seek the answers. There's no need to keep posting the same questions as though you're trying to pound them into others' heads, as though you're trying to convince them to have the same questions you do. YOU are trying to "sway" ME. And you are trying to "sway" thread members & lurkers with your posts. No, I will not join you and I will not publicly join you. I've been burned before with the "group think" atmosphere and prefer to seek my own answers to my own questions. Without "advertising" them and without being disruptive. Whatever you decide to do, just get on with it and do it. I don't understand why your time is being spent on solicitation of others to join you rather than the solicitation of the answers you say you seek. Ellen P.S. I will probably post this reply to you - not your PM - as I want no question(s) as to my stance or comments on this.