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 (30)	5/4/1999 7:15:00 PM
From: TraderGreg	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 32

Frank--How is that? Do you mean that you paid the highest absolute price per share? Because the true "high" price occurred in 1997 or earlier. During 1997, the stock hit a high of around 2 bucks, drifting down to around .06 by the end of 1997. However, after the first reverse in Jan/Feb 1998, that $2 high price became an effective $80 price, taking into account the 1 for 40 reverse. The stock started trading in the 2 to 4 buck range and quickly tanked to .38 by early Mar. They then did another 1 for 40 reverse and the stock traded around 10 to 15 bucks maybe.(Is that when you bought?) However, because of the effects of the two reverses in early 1998, the 1997 high of $2 now equated to $3200!! Put another way, paying $12 a share after two 1 for 40 reverses would have been equivalent to having gotten the stock prior to those reverses for a little under 1 cent a share(12.00/1600=.75 cents). And now, with the last 1 for 250 reverse, that $2 1997 high equates to a ROFLMBO price of $800,000 per share. I owned 2500 1997 type shares that cost$1438. BEFORE the 1 for 250 reverse, my average share price was $719 per share for a rounded up 2 shares. After the 1 for 250, I would, if the calculation even made sense, have owned .008 shares at an average price of $179,750 per share. (The rounding up to 2 shares gave me a discount from what would have been $230,000 per share<g>). Funny that the SEC doesn't seem concerned with this kind of robbery, huh? TG