To: JRSwails who wrote (28883 ) 5/25/1999 12:52:00 AM From: ztect Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 44908
The answer to your question...... The plan will work. Will TSIG work the plan? Will be not answered tomorrow, the day after, next week or next month. No matter how much people gripe or bs on this board. TSIG.com would probably be priced higher if it were a non-reporting OTC-bb like many others. All the suppositions by all the "investors" wouldn't come to light because no one would even know which questions to ask. Share holding and financial arrangements wouldn't be disclosed or even debated because shareholders simply wouldn't know. Heck, even good old Zeev and Ditch have traded some non-reporting OTC-bb's (Zeev in JNNE). What share holders in these type of investments don't know, I guess won't hurt them. Or, I guess they believe everything the company tells them. Shareholders in the non-reporting PNLK don't exactly know what they are holding, yet this stock has moved in spite of a high OS and deeply discounted "pp" that shareholders weren't aware of until long after it happened. Shareholders still don't know the terms of this "pp". I am a shareholder in PNLK. I visited the company and met with the COB and COO. I have a very good understanding of how the business plan is devised and is being implemented so I "invested" in that company. I don't feel compelled to post on that board very frequently. TSIG reports. If TSIG was trying to conceal all its dirty laundry, it simply wouldn't report. Now, I voted to have Marty on the BOD. But I will not make his appointment a basis for my investment decision. I did not invest in TSIG because Marty was going to be appointed to the BOD. Frankly, I didn't even know who Dr. Frankel was when I invested. I know that Marty helped to connect Hwang and Cohesive with TSIG, since as Marty says he doesn't "passively" invest. Whether this qualifies Marty or not, I do not know. I'm not aware of Marty's business acumen or experience. Marty's position on the board may or may not be a re-assuring voice. Though I've talked to Marty on occasion and have no reason to question his integrity, I have never met him. Nor have I met Henry or Gordon. Gordon's past performance may or may not be an indicator of his future performance. Though, from a credibility point of view, having someone with a resume of accomplishments as the CEO and on the BOD would be beneficial to TSIG at this time. For all I know, maybe such a person is on the horizon, then again maybe he isn't. Certainly Hwang is qualified as a technician and resource. But as a CEO? Ideally, getting someone of stature on the board with "silicon valley" or recognized "tech industry names" on their resume would be more meaningful to me. The power of associating TSIG's name with a netscape or something like that would have more impact on stock price IMO. Now who on this thread has actually met or "knows" anyone else on this thread. Who can testify for anyone's integrity? Who has met Gordon, Henry, "Dixie", Marty, or Hwang? Personally, I am now going to focus on getting questions answered as to how exactly deals are structured and revenues generated. I have calls into Mr. Accola (a TSIG distributor)and Sean Kaupinen. I also have an email in to Paul Henry. I'm calling Henry by Wednesday even if my email is answered because I have additional questions. I also will call Richard Olsen tomorrow to see if I can get a copy of the distributor package. Now after re-reading the 10q. I understand that the teleservices division generates revenues on a time-billing basis. How TSIG figured the revenue numbers for the Signature deal, I'm still unclear. Were these numbers based on prior or anticipated receipts from the bi-lingual and loyal & rewards programs. What is the basis for the performa? What is the billing rate? $40 an hr? How many calls ie. time is expected to be billed? Does TSIG have enough equipment and personal (ie capacity) to aggressively pursue other teleservices contracts? Namely providing "e" service telephone support for other e-commerce sites ? Are these agreements being aggressively pursued? Will TSIG provide telephone support for some of Signature's other online divisions like Signature's "Shop4" website? Per the 10q, "....The Online Services division is currently establishing its presence with a suite of fully-integrated e-commerce and Internet hosting products and services. The first development contract has been executed and client work has begun...." What the heck is the "first development contract"? has this been announced? Also from the 10q, only $102,000 in revenues was generated in the first quarter. Where were these revenues generated from? Were these cd's sales? Do these revenues account for the cost of sales? That is gross revenues? Have any receipts been received yet for any card sales from the BR deal or from any other large announced or small unannounced deal? Lifetime Learning's materials appear to have cost $270,000 to assemble and ship, what is the basis for the revenue projection? What is the expected rate of participation initially based on the precedent of other LifeTime Learning Programs? Do 5 or 10 percent of schools and student participate initially? 5 to 10 % of 50,000,000 kids ain't bad selling just 2 card each at $5 per card or is there a three way split with NMF? So many questions to ask, yet everyone of SI "board of investors" seems to be pre-occupied with the side show. The main attraction ultimately will be revenues, and if these revenues exceed the costs of operations which continue to be contained (down 9% from preceding quarter) or, in other words, ...earnings... The story to be told by Gohlin Harris will be one of cards sold by kids or others doing goodwill for schools, charities, non-profits that direct traffic to the Internet where the fund-raisers generated their necessary funds and TSIG.com profits. This story still is being written. Not even through the first couple chapters yet. Everyone needs to continue to allow the story to develop. Too many questions to ask as to where, how and if revenues are being generating. z (spelling not checked)