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 : DCH Technologies (DCH) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Scoobah who wrote (1439)	5/14/1999 4:37:00 PM
From: Sid Turtlman	Respond to of 2513

Steve: I don't know why you are having baited on the SirAlexx/Dr. Harvey thing now, and I, for one, will have no part in it. Whatever one may think about your posting activities of a few months ago, you are behaving yourself in a gentlemanly fashion of late, and I support that.

To: Scoobah who wrote (1439)	5/14/1999 5:00:00 PM
From: Dan B.	Respond to of 2513

I agree with Sid, though obviously perhaps the air is a little clearer on the subject now- which can't hurt. With Francios busy speaking as though he has some intimate knowledge of DCHT's financial situation, i.e. he knows they can't afford some P.R., it's sure going to be wonderful if we soon get to learn the truth of how it is that DCHT hasn't gone under yet. All things considered, it is quite easy to believe your hints that all will be revealed to be well. Seems more than likely to me!

To: Scoobah who wrote (1439)	5/15/1999 6:11:00 AM
From: Sid Turtlman	Read Replies (4) \| Respond to of 2513

More evidence that DCHT's so called customer "Antaeus Corp." still doesn't exist. For anyone new reading this, a few months ago DCHT trumpeted a new relationship with "Antaeus Corp.": biz.yahoo.com Antaeus supposedly has a system for monitoring bridge corrosion which would incorporate DCHT's hydrogen gas sensors. The press release claimed "DCH estimates this application at over $1 million in annual revenue going into the millennium." For a company that evidently had total 1998 sales of $200,000 or so, a contract that would multiply business four or five times is highly significant. The curious thing about the press release was that it gives no address for "Antaeus Corp.", nor does it have a quote from any spokesperson. No matter what directories or web searches anyone did, no one could find the slightest evidence that "Antaeus Corp." existed at all. When asked about this, the company claimed that Antaeus was a joint venture of a public company called Material Technologies (symbol MTEY) and a private company SIMS. Unfortunately for DCHT's story, MTEY files forms with the SEC, and it was pretty obvious from its filings that Antaeus Corp. was just an idea that it was thinking about doing, not something that actually existed in any meaningful sense. In the second half of this post I discussed what the MTEY 10-K said about the matter: Message 8687958 In any event, MTEY just filed its 10-Q for the March quarter, and once again, there isn't the slightest mention or evidence in the numbers of a joint venture that, if it existed and was capable of buying millions of dollars of sensors, would be many times the size of MTEY itself. sec.gov I think the conclusion is inescapable that DCHT's press release was fraudulent; that Antaeus at best exists only on paper; that it has zero or close to zero in funding; that its so called smart bridge monitoring system has not received the government funding that MTEY was hoping it might get; that its smart bridge monitoring system is not yet being tested anywhere; and, given that it probably takes many, many years for a test to determine how well a bridge monitoring system is detecting the formation of rust, the probability that Antaeus would be capable of giving DCHT millions of dollars of orders within the next year or two has to be zero. DCHT had to have known all that when it put out its press release, but perhaps assumed that investors were too stupid to figure this out. Maybe when questioned by authorities, DCHT will claim that the millions in orders it expected "going into the millennium" was referring to the year 3000, not 2000. Do companies intentionally lie on one press release and then get honest on all the others? I guess it can happen, but as one who has been investing in small cap stocks for more than 30 years, I have never seen it. So DCHT is expanding its fuel cell operations? Uh-huh. Tremendous demand for gas sensors? Sure. We believe you, DCHT.