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 : PanAmerican BanCorp (PABN) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Scottoo who wrote (36912)	5/23/1999 3:25:00 PM
From: Sonny Birbarro	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 43774

Hi Folks, Been away for a couple of days. Came back and, it's just like a soap opera! Nothing has changed!!! While wiling away the hours waling away at my keyboard, I thought I'd post the volume figures for the last 3 and a half days on the good ole PABN thread (from 12:00 midnight Thursday morning thru 12:00 noon today) To understand the statistics, you'll need to know that B stands for Basher and G stand for Good Guy or Gal. OK, here goes: Total Posts................................................................295 Posts from B to G.........................................................84........28.47% Posts from G to B.......................................................106.......35.93% Posts from B to B.........................................................16..........5.42% Posts from G to G (about B).........................................42........14.24% Posts from G to G (other topics)...................................47........15.93% Turns out that a full 84% of all posts were by, to or about our 4 bashers who shall remain nameless (but you and they know who they are). Can you spell MONOPOLIZE boys and girls? If we just stop responding to them completely, by ignoring their posts, we can eliminate a whole slew of useless, boring, annoying, time-wasting posts. I hereby pledge to ignore the four. Come on everyone - IGNORE THE FOUR, IGNORE THE FOUR, IGNORE THE FOUR (that's it, you can do it) IGNORE THE FOUR. Cheers all, SB

To: Scottoo who wrote (36912)	5/23/1999 3:50:00 PM
From: ColleenB	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 43774

Yes, and your broker sends you paperwork. Sorry, but last time I looked I didn't receive paperwork on all of these items that I mentioned. But, while you "claim" that your broker is better in keeping you informed via paperwork, when did you get confirmation that the stock you originally purchased under the name of Purewater was changed to PanAmerican. Seems the last time I sold my shares, it was still listed as Purewater and NOT PanAmerican as the PR's claimed was the company's name. #reply-5985575 Also, didn't you find it the least bit odd that on March 9th, the day of the cusip and symbol change, the OTC-BB site had a name change listed, too. They had the name change listed as from Purewater (as current) to PanAmerican. How can that be, if the company had already undergone a name change? Curious, no? I find it curious because we'd been told that the company underwent a name change in October #reply-5985575. The name change was not even mentioned in the PR announcing the cusip and symbol change in March. You don't think the company was hoping that nobody would notice, do you? Hauppauge, NY - March 9, 1999 - PanAmerican BanCorp announces that it has been assigned the new equity symbol "PABN" and commenced trading on the Over The Counter Bulletin Board on March 8, 1999. The company is in the process of completing the transition from the previous symbol, PRWT, to PABN by notifying financial professionals, industry professionals and investors as rapidly as possible. In conjunction with the symbol change, a new CUSIP has been implemented: 69829X-10-1. #reply-8231659 So, what's the problem with/without receiving paperwork regarding the name,cuspi, symbol change on March 9th anyway? Did I claim in that post that this did not happen? #reply-9699710 ...NOT! So, why "question" this unless there's an intent to confuse?