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 : TSNL @ $2- Move over Gatorade, All sport, & Powerade! -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Frank B who wrote (22)	5/4/1999 8:51:00 AM
From: TraderGreg	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 32

The problem with that is, what are you going to nail them for? Dilution? Doing a reverse split? Those are virtual sacraments on the OTC BB. Over a year ago, TSNL allegedly sold the rights to the Rawlings Sports Drink to some company, whose name escapes me. That firm was to provide TSNL shareholders equivalent share value in their company. Here is where it gets interesting. The acquiring company claimed that TriStar did not provide sufficient documentation to permit the acquirer to give TSNL shareholders those shares in the new ownership of the Sports Drink. TriStar put out a "protest" news release stating their displeasure with this response. And that was the end of the matter. As TriStar had already been compensated by the acquiring company, they had very little incentive to fight for their old shareholders' rights. And the acquiring company was perfectly content to leave things as they are. After all, why would the acquirer go out of its way to give up a piece of itself if it could single out any reason for not doing it. By this point in time, TSNL had already done two 1 for 40 reverse splits and was pursuing different goals. Who knows what they were? It is my opinion that the two reverse splits were done to take out some unfriendly large shareholder. Unfortunately, other shareholders were taken out at the same time. Now, ask yourself this. If TriStar gave all necessary documents to the Sports Drink acquirer but the acquirer claims differently, who should the existing shareholders of TSNL sue for damages? While it appears that TSNL and the Sports Drink acquirer may have arranged a deal to essentially squeeze out old TSNL shareholders from their rightful interest in the sports drink(i.e., TSNL won't sue the acquirer as long as the acquirer agrees to not sue TSNL), proving this allegation is next to impossible. And what corporate assets would the shareholders attach if they were to file a class action suit? I assume the last 1 for 250 reverse, amounting to an effective 1 for 400,000 reverse over the past year and a half, has taken out all of the original TSNL shareholders and probably a good bit of the more recent shareholders. TG