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: REW who wrote (26874)	4/26/1999 11:18:00 PM
From: cicak	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 44908

Hi Bob - Marty's post says it all. IMO we need this man on the Board of Directors of TSIG.com. :~):~) Regards, phil.com ===================================================================== Message 9135281 Hi Fred and ALL, << But i would like to hear from Marty. >> And from the volume of e-mails and PMs I have received over the past few weeks from thread members here and on RB (as well as non-posting shareholders) regarding the issue of me having a seat on the BOD, so would a number of other shareholders. Perhaps, it would be easiest if I just briefly summarized my feelings and ideas in outline form. 1) Yes, if I was offered a seat on the BOD I would accept it. To me it is important that every shareholder... whether they have 100 shares or 100,000 shares or 1,000,000 shares be represented and have their voice heard by management. Frankly, this is exactly what I am attempting to do right now, but I do believe having a seat on the Board would be far more more effective. 2) If what has already been posted is accurate, then the Board must have two non-employees or officers on its Board for Nasdaq listing... which is something I believe we all desire. 3) There is absolutely no reason that I would have to stop posting on the threads with certain obvious restrictions. TSIG does have a rule (and I believe a good one and one I personally pushed hard for) that no employee or officer of TSIG can post on the threads. IMO, however, a member of the Board of Directors is not necessarily an employee or officer of TSIG... and in my situation that is certainly the case. There is no reason that I can see that would prevent me from posting as long as a disclaimer was put at the end of each post identifying myself as a member of the BOD. 4) It would be my intent to post a weekly summary of the happenings with our company without divulging inside information (which I am not privy to at this time anyway) and to post responses at any interim time that a question comes up that requires or begs for an immediate or rapid answer. To expect Rob Gordon to post such a weekly synopsis is, IMO, asking too much of the Chairman of the Board and CEO. He, frankly, is just working too hard, as is Paul Henry, to devote that amount of time and energy to the detriment of doing their primary job... running the company and making it a success. 5) Many other quite successful companies have officers and/or members of the BOD posting on the threads quite openly and with integrity and honesty, but without breaking SEC regulations and divulging inside information. I personally see no problem with this. It is certainly better, IMO, than the rumor mill. 6) I believe I have gained the confidence and respect of both TSIG's management and of the shareholders and I have done and will continue to do everything in my power to help make TSIG a success and a superstar. The company has never hesitated to request that we, as shareholders, help the company, i.e.: beta testing, submitting leads for alliances, etc.... and that is the way it should be. At the same time, I also believe it has to be a give and take scenario. The shareholders are entitled to have their voices heard and opinions taken into consideration by management. That certainly doesn't mean attempting to force things down management's throat, but, IMO, management wants and needs a person on the BOD who is a shareholder and is willing to represent the outside shareholders without the distortion of wearing rose-colored glasses because they are too close to the everyday workings of the company. I personally believe that Rob Gordon and management have done a fantastic job since the turnaround of TSIG began. What is lacking, however, and this is only my opinion, is a cold hard look at the perception of the company by outsiders as related to service and other items which have been discussed on the threads by shareholders... and putting into immediate action steps to resolve these matters of concern. That being said, please understand that the decision as to whether I am offered a seat on the Board of Directors lies with both the present Board and you as shareholders. It would certainly be beneficial to have additional members on the Board such as a well known name in the internet world, but I still believe there should always be a seat available on the Board for a representative of the shareholders. As many know I have the experience and would gladly undertake the job. Lord knows, I am doing it now anyway... just without the seat on the BOD where our voice could be heard. The decision lies with you, as shareholders, and with the present Board of Directors. To those who have already contacted me and/or posted on the threads, I thank you for your vote of confidence. If it should come to pass you have my assurance that you will have my complete 100% effort to do everything within my power to assure the success of TSIG and our investment. Best always, Marty

To: REW who wrote (26874)	4/27/1999 7:53:00 AM
From: Bald Eagle	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 44908

FWIW, my CD order from 3/30 finally showed up yesterday. However, there was no "lagniappe" in my order like REW suggested that there might be.

To: REW who wrote (26874)	4/27/1999 8:42:00 AM
From: MskiHntr	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 44908

Thanks for agreeing to disagree. That's what these forums are for. The elimination of the loan privilege will not have a positive effect on the financials because it is not currently part of the financials. If anything it is a potential safety net for the corporation should it run aground on the shoals of financial straits. If that event ever came about I would hope that the lookouts on the bridge would see the impending collision. I suspect the price of the stock would be an early warning signal. I agree that Marty is qualified to sit on any board, but in reality what can he bring to the this company's table that he is not already bearing? He's got the ear of management. He has introduced business contacts to the company. He has voiced shareholder concerns. He has introduced individuals to the company that have been hired. All of this for free per Marty's own words, no compensation was received either in the form of cash or shares, directly or indirectly. I would rather see individuals nominated to the BOD who have expertise in one or more of the related fields that the company is endeavoring to be successful in. The BOD should be and is working in the best interests of the shareholders as per Marty's various and sundry posts. The BOD are the biggest shareholders in the company, of course they're working in the best interests; they will have the most to gain. Lastly, and despite the rationalizations that Marty offered, as a member of the BOD you are a paid representative of the company. Marty's role as a poster on this thread and any other public forum would cease upon his election to the BOD. As he so eloquently pointed out, just wandering around the halls of TSIG, visiting with executives, and chatting with members of the various divisions, you pick up a lot of information. You see flow charts, appointment calendars, hear a slip of the lip, see the loose business card of a visiting outside executive or vendor, find discarded work papers in the photocopy room, etc. That's inside information. And, any hint of offering that kind of information without putting it out for full public disclosure, not just on some chat thread, could result in getting fitted for a suit of horizontal pinstripes; not very fashionable, disclaimers notwithstanding. My view concurs with yours: the forward direction of the company. April 1998 to April 1999 has seen a world of changes. These changes have occurred with the current management at the helm with the able assistance of a notable bunch of deck hands from both the SI & RB threads. To those individuals I say continue your efforts, but let's not try to micro-manage the company from our perspective. I certainly don't think I'm capable to do so. Keeping the faith. Best, Joe