SI
SI
discoversearch

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.
Non-Tech : RECY Looking Good... A -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: Jack Ucci who wrote (6749)5/19/1999 4:26:00 PM
From: Jack Ucci  Respond to of 7006
 
I attempted to amend this part of the previous message(but the 15 min limit expired)

>>Maybe a timely 10-Q would have exposed the problem to shareholders and to the analysts and the game would have been over.

This brings to mind the possibility of shareholder legal action when the truth is on the table.<<

something to the effect "a timely (most recent) 10-Q ...blah blah should have been a first priority" and secondly that legal action might be a means that brings (some of) the truth to the table.

I am baffled why the company chose this course of holding back even the minimal amount of info that is required in the 10-Q. There is no reason that I can see other than damage control. The alternative is that management is incompetent.

Jack







To: Jack Ucci who wrote (6749)5/20/1999 3:45:00 AM
From: Mahatmabenfoo  Respond to of 7006
 
Maybe you are missing my point -- which is a company that the market thinks is worth 1 cent a share cannot be "downgraded". It's already as long as it can go, without disappearing.

I don't understand the SEC issue you have -- is what happened that RECY believes it has a colorable reason to delay providing information, and disclosed that fact? If so, doesn't sound too bad...

But if you're right that it is bad....

> This brings to mind the possibility of shareholder legal action when the truth is on the table

Sure -- against what assets?

- Charles