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.

Technology Stocks : GateField (GATE) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: grace who wrote (3674)	5/25/1999 6:20:00 PM
From: Michael Greeley	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 4005

In the proxy Gate has hinted that it is trying to interest institutional investors in the company's stock but that because of restrictions on price many potential investors are unable to buy the stock. Suppose there is a potential deal with a large investor contingent on the stock price reaching some agreed upon level (> $5.00?). Wouldn't this account for the proposal to reduce the number of cs by a factor of 10? And wouldn't such an investment (depending on the size) be better than the alternatives?

To: grace who wrote (3674)	5/25/1999 9:54:00 PM
From: easytarget	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 4005

Grace I read the proxy statement as stating that both common shares AND preferred shares would be affected by the reverse split. Also all stock options, warrants, etc. would be similarly affected. In fact the only number that wasn't to be adjusted by the ten to one reverse split was the 65million shares authorized. Instead of 41million shares issued and 24million shares authorized but unissued, we would have 4.1million shares issued and 61million shares authorized but unissued. This doesn't mean I am going to vote for the reverse split. After all this does increase the authorized shares by a huge amount. But this is not solely on the backs of the small investor. All investors are treated equally. EZ