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.

Gold/Mining/Energy : PYNG Technologies -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: m. jacobs who wrote (3704)	4/26/1999 5:39:00 PM
From: Veritas	Respond to of 8117

Mr. Jacobs, just ignore the ranters and complainers, but do post some facts/news here when legally able to do so. Company officials should not be REQUIRED to take part in chat sites. I for one am pleased that you do. Just keep the NEWS coming. Thanks.

To: m. jacobs who wrote (3704)	4/26/1999 7:40:00 PM
From: GWD	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 8117

Hi Mr Jacobs Thank you for your post. Regards GWD

To: m. jacobs who wrote (3704)	4/26/1999 8:27:00 PM
From: tom eland	Respond to of 8117

Dr.Michael Jacobs, President and CEO, Pyng Technologies, Dear Mike: I have a gut feeling about that the "best is yet to come" as you stated in 1998 and you are patiently working to silence the critics on this thread!! Your company is a hold stock and has to be treated as such!! Further more I believe that any critical and potential products which have orders with or have the potential of having orders with the military in sensitive areas for security measures, should be totally handled by the manufacturing parent to maintain a operations of stealth in the theatre of war or for national security!! Thanks again Mike and and let all of us prosper together!!! tom

To: m. jacobs who wrote (3704)	4/27/1999 6:10:00 PM
From: LOR	Read Replies (5) \| Respond to of 8117

Warning....to all Potential PYNG Share Buyers !!! To ALL .... but especially to M. Jacobs and some of the more gullible posters to this forum Our illustrious PYNG CEO has once again graced this forum with a rare post. At first I thought he was responding to my recent polite query to him ( Post# 3688 ). However, seeing as how that particular post could hardly be called a rant I gather Mike was also referring to my totally unrelated message to none other then Mike's distant cousin AH ( ie. my Post# 3702 ). I guess Mike failed [ as usual ] to read the title and end of that message which indicated "humorous response [ ie. to AH as opposed to M.Jacobs ]". Nonetheless, we must congratulate Mike for at long last finding his voice on this forum and providing at least a partial response to some unanswered questions. Now, for those of you ******* "who actually have an interest in LOR's comments" * let me [ ie. LOR ] review what Mike did [ and did NOT ] say in his most recent gem: 1) FAST-1 will be in the BTLS issue believed to be available in August, 2) the FAST-1 will be in the "Optional" section of the BTLS as it will be considered as ONE OF the CHOICES that can be made when vascular access is not available by conventional I.V., 3) FAST-1 units have been shipped and sold at a price of US $ 98.50 to S.O.C. Rangers and the University of Uniformed Services and potential distributors have been quoted this price. Now, for what Mike Jacob's did << NOT >> say in his most recent attempt to update this forum: A) Mike does NOT say that All orders received to date have been for modest quantities and primarily for purposes of evaluation. However, there is no evidence of PYNG having received other then small orders as nothing substantial has been announced and PYNG is NOT currently ready for "mass production" anyway. Therefore the price of US $98.50 achieved for these small orders is hardly an indication of what the market will bear for "mass production" large quantity orders. Of course Mike has given out this price to everybody and his brother. However, you don't have to be a rocket scientist to realize that "big volume" buyers will expect a lower or discounted price, potentially MUCH lower then Mike's pipe dream price, B) Mike does NOT say that PYNG will have to show flexibility on the price when it comes time to "negociate" real "mass production" orders in order to be competitive with other IO devices also currently available and FDA approved and which have been deemed "suitable" by Walter Reed investigators. Although Mike himself is convinced of the superiority of the FAST-1 it is unfortunate that it will not be Mike Jacobs who will be doing the "buying" of IO devices, C) Mike does NOT say that either he has received a "mass production" order or is expecting to receive one in the very near future but regardless of that fact he still plans to be in production by 4'th quarter ...... presumably because he is so confident that PYNG will have such order(s) before that time. ( Mike was also confident about PYNG receiving significant commercial orders in 1998 and we all know how those hopes evaporated into thin air ), D) Mike does NOT say why PYNG can not report winning any "mass production" orders to date. Seeing has how Mike insists on implying that he sees no problem obtaining "mass production" orders at the "pie in the sky" price of US $ 98.50 and seeing as how PYNG has had 7 years to work out design and mass production details it would seem that PYNG should provide some plausible explanation for NOT having received that ever ellusive first "mass production" order.. so Mike, what is your answer ???? LOR P.S.- I must thank you for indicating that I have "indeed lost it". That was very intuitive on your part and I guess what you meant by "IT" was the word "confidence" ......... that is "confidence that PYNG will soon: announce receipt of a major "mass production" order of the FAST-1 at US $ 98.50 each *** Yes Mike, you are right, I have lost confidence ..... as have many others which of course helps to explain why PYNG's share price has remained for so long back in the far recesses of the DOG house. Good luck anyway ......... even dreams ( $ US 98.50 ) might come true .... but don't stop buying those lottery tickets as it seems the odds are about as good of picking the winning number as of making a solid return from PYNG's share price. LOR

To: m. jacobs who wrote (3704)	5/4/1999 10:32:00 PM
From: Jack Rayfield	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 8117

Mr Jacobs: What does "by the last quarter" mean? "We will be in production by the last quarter, as indicated in our news releases." Does this phrase mean that production will commence before December 31,1999 i.e. the end of the fourth calendar quarter. In the Viavid clip you stated that "the FAST 1 would be in production by December if not before." I hope that you can understand my confusion as "by last quarter" would usually mean the company's last quarter which in Pyng's case starts in July. If this is an accurate interpretation of Pyng's current production schedule then Pyng expects it to take 7-8 months to ramp up production. Could you please enlighten us on the four or five significant milestones which can be identified as interim points in bringing the product to mass production? Back in November 1998 my understanding was that once the field trial data was gathered and the design was finalized then the time needed to ramp up production would be 3-4 months. Obviously the plan that gave rise to these estimates has changed and I would be interested to know what developments have resulting in a doubling of the time frame. Could you please give us some type of update on the progress made so far in regard to this statement made in the April 9,1999 press release- "Mass production analysis, individual component review for mass production, and design changes to maximize cost savings while ensuring quality are all presently being reviewed. Subcontractors, suppliers, tool and die makers, injection molders, who meet the required medical device criteria are being identified and will be contacted, with the goal of fast tracking the System into mass production." Are any of the third party contract manufacturers reviewed so far being seriously considered or is Pyng still in the Mass production analysis phase? Thanks in advance for your response. Jack

To: m. jacobs who wrote (3704)	5/11/1999 7:51:00 PM
From: 24karat	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 8117

Thankyou, Michael, for the nice reply to my email. I'm not going to relate to this thread,just what was discussed. But I will say , what you told me has been, definitely, encouraging. For those who have doubts and are about to sell, don't.Mr. Jacobs has put seven years into this product,he's not about to fail. I have invested fairly heavily into Pyng, and am more sure today that I will get a good return on my investment. If you want answers, email the company. I did :)

To: m. jacobs who wrote (3704)	5/13/1999 12:52:00 PM
From: LOR	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 8117

PYNG...the Never Ending Saga Continues, Mike, and another great big "thank you" to you as it was really great to hear yesterday that all the bugs have finally been solved in the FAST-1 product and that you may be able to produce the "modified" FAST-1 in respectable quantities by November 1999. I now fully understand why you can not announce orders at this time and that you expect to be able to do so in a June/July time frame. Although I have agreed "NOT" to tell the forum more, I feel obliged to ask you to post something to the forum to show that PYNG is not taking it's publicly stated commitment to keep the forum "informed" lightly. Of course, I speak not for myself but rather for the hundreds of loyal fans you have on the SI-PYNG forum many of whom have expressed their sincere belief and goodwill towards PYNG numerous times over the past years. I am sure you will agree with me that they deserve the "more frequent" communication which you promised earlier this year. Further, a busy guy like yourself can hardly be expected to reply to all these folks private "e-mail" on an individual basis .... right ? All the best, LOR NOTE: P.T.T.A.W.A.F.G.O.S. ----- I.I.A.J.-----L.P."R".P.R.

To: m. jacobs who wrote (3704)	5/14/1999 2:34:00 PM
From: AriKirA	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 8117

Well, after seeing what happened yesterday, I must say that I don't know what to think. Hopefully, I wasn't the only one that noticed the manipulation. After the stock ran to the mid 80s on a market order put in by Georgia Pacific 'someone' saw that the MD was quite thin on the bid side and therefore decided to sell some shares in order to bring the price down to 1.70. Having broken said level, someone put 7500 shares on the ask at 1.70. Coincidence with the PR regarding the issuance of options? No proof here, but kind of weird because this morning said bid didn't appear on the depth. Could someone have driven down the price before issuing the PR in order to look good (issue options exercisable at a higher price)? Well, only one person knows that answer, right Mike? Now, were you aware that the underlying principle of any major exchange's Policy on timely disclosure is that all persons investing in securities listed on a major exchange have EQUAL access to information that may AFFECT their investment decision? Not sure, but the way management seems to be dealing with PR doesn't necessarily reflect said statement, does it? Well, maybe this might help clear things up. From a legal point of view, information is classified on different levels. Of these, the most important level is known as material information. What is material information? Material information is any information relating to the business and affairs of the company that results or MAY REASONABLY be expected to result in a SIGNIFICANT change in the value or market price of a company's listed securities. In the case at hand, no one would argue that an order (as insignificant as it may be : 2,000-3,000 shares) would have a SIGNIFICANT impact on the stock price. Without limiting the generality of the foregoing, the following is generally considered to be material in nature and require IMMEDIATE DISCLOSURE: any development relating to the business and affairs of the company that would reasonably be expected to significantly affect the market price or value of any of the company's securities or that would reasonably be expected to have a significant influence on an INFORMED INVESTOR'S INVESTMENT DECISIONS. Now, even the smallest order would add some credibility to the company and its product. Even more, if it was from the army. Mike, just hope you haven't delayed any deals with third parties because you are not ready for MASS production. Being in the business for 30 or so years, you know better than me that a backlog is the best way to go before production starts right? Jack/LOR, would one of you know if the company is incorporated under the Canada Business Corporations Act? Or is it under provincial law? I presume it would be under federal law. Just curious. Thanks in advance AK