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 : ABFG - AMERICAN BENEFITS GROUP, INC. -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Spamboy who wrote (2907)	4/27/1999 1:08:00 AM
From: Henry Volquardsen	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 4128

I find it infinitely better on SI. Yes both boards have their good and bad but the extremes of the bad are greater at RB and the good is rarer. That is a statement of opinion. If you disagree fine. But I believe Zonkie has posted excerpts of some of the really nasty stuff on RB. I have very rarely seen anything of similar character on SI. As to the lawsuit against Bill, Janice and Jeff, I hope they prevail. The Webnode site was clearly a parody and it is my belief a court will see it as such. I think sending a news release via Business Wire was a bad idea and told Janice that privately after the fact. The reason I thought it was a bad idea was not because of legal concerns but because news wires do not have a sense of humour. That is again my opinion but appears to be proving out. As I said I believe the court will clearly see Webnode as a parody. I have said before that I have a great deal of respect for Janice, Jeff and Bill. They do an excellent job of research. I also like them as people and wish them well in this. I hope you haven't aligned yourself to close to these people, cause they are about to go down in a VERY big way. ABFG isn't finished with them yet, either! More to come, my friend! Watch May 15th!!! I am aligned with them by friendship. Other than that I believe my independence of thought has been clear. I like you Henry - Be careful, my friend! I will assume that was meant in friendship and not as a threat. Henry

To: Spamboy who wrote (2907)	4/27/1999 1:20:00 AM
From: Jeffrey S. Mitchell	Respond to of 4128

From the BCSC report on Sklar, pages 18-20: Sklar's credibility was a significant issue in the proceedings. At one point Sklar categorically denied having been advised by Tarnowski and rinkborer, after the January 23 meeting at the Exchange, to issue a news release verifying the status of the private placements. Both Tarnowski and Zinkhofer were called as witnesses and each of them confirmed having given such advice to Sklar. Sklar offered no explanation of why he spent so much time and effort on Revcon and Ainbinder other than to say that he either assured or was told that they had European clients who were participating in the placements through the DG Bank. We are not satisfied with this explanation and believe that Sklar's understanding of the role played by Revcon and Ainbinder went far beyond what he admitted to in his evidence. Skiar prepared and kept current due diligence packages for Max, INQ and Dexx. In the DeXX package, Sklar was described aa a chartered accountant. At the hearing he acknowledged that he was not and never had been a chartered accountant, and that the description was inaccurate. Sklar and Skolnik were both surprised when they were told of the letters from DG Bank during the meeting at the Exchange on January 23. In our judgment, their surprise was learning of the existence of the letters rather than the information which they contained. We find it peculiar that, although documentation of every collateral aspect of the private placements was both plentiful and meticulous, there was nothing in writing confirming DG Bank's commitment to participate in the private placements. The incident with Brown, in which Sklar offered to apply corporate assets to settle a personal account, is further evidence of a failure to adhere to the standards required of an officer and director of an issuer and, in our judgment, was not merely an isolated, angry outburst. We consider the incident quite consistent with the general pattern of irresponsible and dishonest conduct which Sklar displayed throughout the period under review. Continuous disclosure of material information about reporting issuers is fundamental to an effective and credible securities market. The false and misleading disclosure in this case was occasioned by Sklar's failure to fulfill his duties as a director and officer of a reporting issuer. Initially, he failed to ensure that the information he was releasing was true. Later, he failed to act honestly after he knew the information was false. His behaviour was prejudicial to the public interest. Accordingly, the Commission orders: 1. under section 145 (1) of the Act, that the exemptions described in sections 30 to ~2, 55, 5B, 81 and 82 do not apply to Sklar for a period of three years; 2. under section 145.1, that Sklar resign as a director and officer of all reporting issuers and is prohibited from becoming or acting as a director or officer of any reporting issuer for a period of three years; and 3. under section 154.1, that Sklar pay for the costs of or related to the hearing that are incurred by or on behalf of the Commission or the Superintendent, such coBts to be determined by the Commission. Dated at Vancouver, British Columbia this 18th day of September, 1989. For the Commission Mr. Mohan S. Jawl Member Mr. Edward L. Lien Member Mr. Jeremy P.H. McCall Member