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 : JAWS;A P/E of 2 with 150%/yr Erngs Growth!! -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: tkb who wrote (4033)	4/28/1999 10:19:00 AM
From: del clark	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 4230

Fair enough, $10 it is then. Shares count goes up I win. Share count goes down you win. If shares are even it becomes a wash. Nutstoo has been wrong about just about everything he has said about this stock from the beginning. He is still an interesting read though. I love this stock. It is very entertaining.

To: tkb who wrote (4033)	4/28/1999 1:53:00 PM
From: Zeus549	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 4230

Tom, could you give us an explanation of the "loan" of shares by Colin? Also could you sight me anywhere a glossary of investment terms that includes "chill" in the sense that you are using it?I think what del is responding to is just a reaction to decisions by management that have not been beneficial in anyway to shareholders. I don't think there is any question that Colin is richer. In fact I believe he has a higher net worth than he has ever had in his life. But are we shareholders richer also? With the dilution,the answer is no.So his increase wealth has been at our expense IMO. With BB's of course this is one of the basic scenarios to be mindful of, so when things take place that re-enforce these scenarios, then a negative reaction is the result and may be very justifiably so. It is easy to say--"but look at all the new contracts with high profile companies". Unless it translates to the bottom line for shareholders, it doesn't mean much. The market is not stupid on balance. So then, the reply is--"well if it wasn't for those nasty illegal shorts things would be better". This is also a common response from BB's as to why there magnificent company's stock is not "where it should be". These rationalizations and scenarios in the BB market are as old as dirt. The only thing that keeps them alive at all is the greed factor and the fact that on occasion they do play out. VERY few and far between though.