Register for free to join our community of investors and share your ideas. You will also get access to streaming quotes, interactive charts, trades, portfolio, live options flow and more tools.
Register for free to join our community of investors and share your ideas. You will also get access to streaming quotes, interactive charts, trades, portfolio, live options flow and more tools.
It really needs to be something stronger than that... lol
Sara : )
Clearing up the FUE issue
Re: FUE entities plead guilty
by: MST_2000 08/07/01 07:09 pm
Msg: 129227 of 129246
FUE entities? Is Pugliese an entity?
Was anybody in ASTN implicated? No? Oh, I would not have figured that out from your many posts on the subject.
From Day 1, the FUE indictments concerned stock manipulation involving 5 stocks, one of which was ASTN. The 1997 SEC civil investigation into FUE involved the very same thing. Nobody has ever said that FUE was not accused of manipulating ASTN stock. The objection from those of us who have battled you on this has been to your unsubstantiated claims that ASTN was aware of it, had to have known about it, and other similar comments that try, through innuendo and outright distortion of fact, to take accusations against individuals employed by FUE and turn them into accusations against ASTN (which is NOT what they were). Try as you might, no official with the SEC, FBI, DOJ, NYAG or otherwise has yet implicated any ASTN insider or employee in the FUE stock manipulation case. If they had, you would have posted it about 100 times by now.
That is the essence of ASTN's complaint (and ours as well). You are overlooking the forest for the trees. You have been since you arrived here.
MST
http://messages.yahoo.com/bbs?.mm=FN&action=m&board=4687979&tid=astn&sid=4687979&...
more clarification
By: mst2K $$$$
Reply To: 20874 by MMMARY $$$ Tuesday, 7 Aug 2001 at 7:58 PM EDT
Post # of 20878
It should never have happened. The arbitration award was "set aside" and "vacated" --- vacating an award is equivalent to saying it should never have been entered in the first place. That is my main point.
A fair report of it would acknowledge those simple facts, not headline the part that is no longer true. Like when Jewell got arrested for the Atlanta Olympic bombing and the police ultimately acknowledged they had arrested the wrong guy, that Jewell had nothing to do with it. Your post would be like headlining "Jewell Arrested" without pointing out that he was completely cleared when it ended.
MST
http://ragingbull.lycos.com/mboard/boards.cgi?board=ASTN&read=20875
NASD lifted suspension
By: mst2K $$$$
Reply To: 20868 by MMMARY $$$ Tuesday, 7 Aug 2001 at 6:39 PM EDT
Post # of 20876
Should read: "NASD lifts Suspension of Fred's NASD license because N.Y. court reverses Arbitration Award on which the suspension was based."
This is taken verbatim from your post: "On October 24, 1996, the Arbitration Award was set aside and vacated with respect to Rittereiser, by Order of the Supreme Court of the State of New York, Fredric W. Rittereiser v. Dennis James Karol, Stipulation Index. No. 116385/96. On December 3, 1994, the NASD suspension of Rittereiser was lifted, due to the New York court's order to vacate."
That's the real story. Fred's license should never have been suspended in the first place. The rest of your cut and paste just tells the sequence of events leading to the decision of the Court ultimately setting aside the arbitrator and vacating the award that gave rise to the suspension in the first place. Now why would you leave that out of the headline you chose to attach to your post? Couldn't be that YOU'RE BIASED, could it?
Hope you present your own case in court with the same skill and even-handedness - it'll make a great impression on the finder of fact.
MST
http://ragingbull.lycos.com/mboard/boards.cgi?board=ASTN&read=20869
I want to go on public record that I believe this post that I am replying to should not be posted. It contains personal soc security information on the CEO's in laws. IMO it is pure harrassment.
This is exactly the type of innuendo that is not based in fact. The facts are that astn was not accussed of any wrong doing in connection to their ipo. There is absolutely no proof they were aware or had any involved. Your continued insistance that there is a connection is why ASTN is one of the reasons ASTN is suing you.
Sara
Deceptive and misleading again... astn was not implicated in any fraud. Your headings need to match reality.
Month-to-date eVWAP volumes
8/07 933,800 X 2
8/06 795,200 X 2
8/03 1,415,800 X 2
8/02 444,800 X 2
8/01 102,000 X 2
Total 3,691,600 X 2
-----------------------------
July Total 13,240,400 X 2
Can you imagine someone harrassing the elderly in-laws of a CEO by posting their personal home address online? and posting their personal financial information? Ms. Malicious strikes again.
I don't have the words to properly describe such a vicious and unscrupulous nutcase.
Sara
eVWAP 933,800 X 2
By: stosh_5 $$$
Reply To: None Tuesday, 7 Aug 2001 at 9:49 AM EDT
Post # of 20864
933,800 x 2 confirmed
http://ragingbull.lycos.com/mboard/boards.cgi?board=ASTN&read=20864
Did they both say that? LOL
Sara : )
Another clue... this one is good for a big laugh!
"...that I'm not posting on ihub..."
http://messages.yahoo.com/bbs?.mm=FN&action=m&board=4687979&tid=astn&sid=4687979&...
Just wish it was true!
Sara : )
Guess who got caught telling another big lie:
http://messages.yahoo.com/bbs?.mm=FN&action=m&board=4687979&tid=astn&sid=4687979&....
http://messages.yahoo.com/bbs?.mm=FN&action=m&board=4687979&tid=astn&sid=4687979&....
and is now whiiiiinnning:
http://www.investorshub.com/boards/read_msg.asp?message_id=156248
be sure to notice the times of the posts... so obvious!
Specialty Pharmaceuticals
By: dorine $$$
Reply To: 90 by dorine $$$ Monday, 6 Aug 2001 at 1:46 PM EDT
Post # of 91
THE WALL STREET TRANSCRIPT PUBLISHES SPECIALTY PHARMACEUTICALS ISSUE BUSINESS EDITORS & HEALTH/MEDICAL WRITERS BIOWIRE2K NEW YORK--(BW HEALTHWIRE)--AUG. 6, 2001--SIX ANALYSTS, TWO EXPERTS INTERVIEWS
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
NEW YORK--(BW HealthWire)--Aug. 6, 2001--Six analysts, two experts
interviews and top management from twenty-four sector firms examine
the Specialty Pharmaceuticals sector in this special 134-page issue
from The Wall Street Transcript (212/952-7433) or
http://www.twst.com/info/info397.htm.
In a vital review of this sector for investors and industry
professionals, this valuable 134-page Special Issue features:
1) Specialty Pharmaceuticals -- In an in-depth (12,700 words)
Analyst Roundtable, Timothy Anderson, Analyst covering the Specialty
Pharmaceuticals and Drug Delivery sectors at Prudential Securities,
Erick Lucera, Analyst at CJS Capital Management, LLC, Ian Sanderson,
Managing Director at SG Cowen, Richard Silver, Senior Vice President
at Lehman Brothers and Jerry Treppel, Managing Director with Banc of
America Securities LLC, examine the outlook for the sector and share
specific stock recommendations.
Silver reports, "Teva (Nasdaq:TEVA.Q) probably stands out as being
the most successful with an aggressive generic acquisition strategy on
a global basis, demonstrating that generics can fuel long-term growth
if the acquisition targets make sense and as long as post acquisition
integration capabilities are strong."
2) Drug Delivery Stocks -- In an in-depth (4,000 words) Analyst
Interview, Louis Webb, Jr., Principal with Dain Rauscher Wessels,
examines the outlook for the sector and shares specific stock
recommendations.
3) Intersecting with Specialty Pharmaceuticals -- In an in-depth
(3,300 words) Expert Interview, John Rhodes, Managing Partner for
Pharmaceuticals and Life Sciences at Deloitte & Touche, examines the
outlook for the sector and shares specific stock recommendations.
4) Executive Search for Pharmaceutical Companies -- In an in-depth
(2,800 words) Expert Interview, Robert Hennessy, Managing Director at
Hennessy Group, examines the outlook for the sector and shares
specific stock recommendations.
5) The TWST confidential Off-The-Record survey of management
performance at seventeen sector firms asked market insiders about the
ability of management teams to create shareholder value.
6) CEO interviews (average 2,500 words). Top management of
twenty-four sector firms examine the outlook for their firm and the
sector.
To obtain the CEO interviews/Off-The-Record management performance
full interview report, see http://www.twst.com/info/info397.htm.
The Wall Street Transcript does not endorse the views of any
interviewee nor does it make stock recommendations.
--30--jlp/clv*
http://ragingbull.lycos.com/mboard/boards.cgi?board=TEVA&read=91
Month-to-date eVWAP volumes
8/06 795,200 X 2
8/03 1,415,800 X 2
8/02 444,800 X 2
8/01 102,000 X 2
Total 2,757,800 X 2
-----------------------------
July Total 13,240,400 X 2
eVWAP 795,200 X 2
By: stosh_5 $$$
Reply To: None Monday, 6 Aug 2001 at 10:03 AM EDT
Post # of 20850
795,200 x 2 confirmed
http://ragingbull.lycos.com/mboard/boards.cgi?board=ASTN&read=20844
Thanks! Having a great director helps a lot!
Sara : )
Nice day today! eom
Mary,
"Delisting, dilution, SEC violation..."
Your title on top of that news item is extremely misleading. There is nothing in that article about delisting or any kind of SEC violation. This kind of deceptive posting is not welcome here.
ATG's major packages are nearly
by: wjr42 08/03/01 11:50 am
Msg: 128447 of 128447
in place. A few years ago when ATG started up VWAP, a large seat holder on PHLX said that ATG didn't have the liquidity. Now it looks like they do.
100millon shares liquidity everyday is enough for 200,000 shares for every issue on the S&P500. FR will push it to 200,000,000.
The guarantee program is a new idea, and it is just starting.
The regular eVWAP session is finally generating some business. It really needs some list players however. FR said on the 7/27 FwF that we should soon see improvements.
The 10:30 sesssion could start anytime. FR said within weeks, with the end of Sept the latest.
Now we have eClose finally setup with NAS, so it can start on all SP500 issues. They will probably do this as a guarantee program too.
The quant institutions are already doing NAS stocks, and most likely the volumes are not showing up on the PHLX. So we don't know how much volume. We also don't know the revenue, unless we assume it is the same as FR said is for the guarantee program.
The only trouble with what is happening now is we won't know the revenues until ATG issues the next 10Q or at the SH meeting.
http://messages.yahoo.com/bbs?.mm=FN&action=m&board=4687979&tid=astn&sid=4687979&...
eVWAP 1,415,800
By: stosh_5 $$$
Reply To: None Friday, 3 Aug 2001 at 9:45 AM EDT
Post # of 20791
1,415,800 x 2 confirmed
http://ragingbull.lycos.com/mboard/boards.cgi?board=ASTN&read=20789
News Today!
PHILADELPHIA, Aug 3, 2001 (BUSINESS WIRE) -- The Ashton Technology Group, Inc. (ASTN, Trade) announced today that Ashton's affiliate agency broker, Croix Securities, Inc., has been granted its application to operate CroixNet(TM), an alternative trading system (ATS), by NASD Regulation, Inc. (NASDR).
Croix had filed ATS applications with the NASDR and the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) in April of this year. The SEC application was a notice filing under Regulation ATS under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, but the NASDR application required express approval by the NASDR.
6 CroixNet is an anonymous intelligent matching system that will execute trades in all listed and NASDAQ issues at eCLOSE(TM) Prices, based on primary exchange market and NASDAQ closing prices. The System will operate as an ATS platform of Croix.
Participants receive confidential, binding match reports before the New York Stock Exchange and NASDAQ close with the eCLOSE Prices automatically ascribed to such trades following the market close. Croix's existing anonymity clearing relationship with Broadcort Capital Corp. will be extended to the processing of CroixNet trades.
Fredric Rittereiser, Ashton Chairman and Chief Executive Officer, said, "We see CroixNet as a highly complementary trading platform to its eVWAP sister systems, which are facilities of the Philadelphia and Toronto Stock Exchanges." He added, "The plan is to provide institutional and broker-dealer customers seamless access to all of these confidential, market impact eliminating systems." Mr. Rittereiser stated that a launch date would be announced for CroixNet upon completion of an initial marketing phase.
Ashton is an eCommerce company developing a network of affiliated companies. Ashton companies build and market technology-based products and services enabling businesses and consumers to execute better-informed transactions within global electronic marketplaces.
Ashton creates electronic transaction and distribution systems for the global financial services industry utilizing advanced telecommunication, computing, data and information security, and Internet technologies.
The forgoing press release contains forward-looking statements based on current management expectations. A variety of important factors could cause results to differ materially from such statements. Factors that could cause actual results to differ from current expectations include unexpected regulatory issues, industry trends, and competition.
These and other risks are described in greater detail in Ashton's filings with the Securities and Exchange Commission, including those on forms 10-K and 10-Q.
Websites: www.ashtontechgroup.com and www.evwap.com. CONTACT: Ashton Technology Group, Philadelphia Christine Geisser, 215/789-3300 Telefax: 215/789-3397 Shareholder email: shquestions@ashtontechgroup.com URL: http://www.businesswire.com Today's News On The Net - Business Wire's full file on the Internet with Hyperlinks to your home page.
Copyright (C) 2001 Business Wire. All rights reserved.
http://www.clearstation.com/cgi-bin/bbs?post_id=2469126&Refer=http://www.clearstation.com/
"...I just outsmarted the overpaid programmers..."
I resemble that remark!
How about a dozen chocolate chip cookies?
(::) (::) (::) (::) (::) (::)
(::) (::) (::) (::) (::) (::)
and a cup of milk
c[]
Sara : )
Glad to see IHub back! Thanks.
c[] <---- mug of cold Pepsi
Sara : )
Matt,
I seem to be having a problem posting when I "Respond" to a post, but it works ok to post a new message.
Sara : )
Geez... I read those posts and all John did was post PR's and links to their website that gave the information about their product. Do you have proof they knew it was "fake" before it came to light? Or is it one of your "he should have known" things?
Sounds like another case of Ms. Muffet style slander to me.
Sara
"Can't remember the lie. True mark of a poor liar."
Reminds me of that quote by Mark Twain something to the effect that if you always tell the truth, you have nothing to remember!
Have a great day!
Sara : )
LFZA up 53% this morning... congrats John!
Sara : )
eVWAP 444,800 X 2
By: stosh_5 $$$
Reply To: None Thursday, 2 Aug 2001 at 9:50 AM EDT
Post # of 20758
444,800 x 2 confirmed
http://ragingbull.lycos.com/mboard/boards.cgi?board=ASTN&read=20757
Hey John...
"Who cares what goes on - on RagingBullschmidt...!!!"
LOL... actually, you're right. I spend less and less time over there since discovering IHub.
Sara : )
Hi JoeMuchBetterHandicapLong,
Does biting my fingernails count? LOL
She's in denial that everyone is onto her "guilt by association" methods, half-truths, innuendos and outright lies... 47 posters on Yahoo recommended a post that caught Mary in a lie... and when cornered, the only defense she has left is to launch vicious personal attacks and attempt to demonize those she feels are a threat.
The fact that she sees it as good vs evil, says a lot about her warped frame of mind.
Sara
Amazing, Joe, when someone gets the freedom to say anything they want how quickly they can make a fool of themselves!
Sara : )
Hey John,
Did you notice Ms. Muffet over on RB bashing you on the LFZA board and me on the ASTN board? Guess she knows she can't get away with those kinds of personal attacks over here on IHub.
Have a great evening!
Sara : )
TA looks really good! eom
LOL...
A person who has no brain posts things like these:
Over generalization
“CEOs are supposed to lie”
“That's their job. That is what they are paid to do. They are company poster boys and they better have a big ole smile on their face all the time.”
“Lying is an asset in the corporate world.”
Threats to posters, lack of scruples
“I have all of your information. Perhaps I will go get an expendable user name and post it.”
Jumping to conclusions based on one case
“I was burned by an offshore insurance company.”
“NEVER TO DO BUSINESS WITH A CAYMAN ISLAND COMPANY.”
And who does this all the time?
“It's always the ones fouling others who cry fould the loudest”
Paranoia… thinks this is a high school debate
“Lately I have found myself in e-mail discussions with Induhviduals who employ debating tactics that are very similar. I suspect they are learning these methods in some sort of top-secret Induhvidual training facility. The Induhvidual debating technique involves four steps: 1. Exaggerate your opponent's statement into an absurd absolute. 2. Make an inappropriate analogy. 3. Change the topic to something easier to defend. 4. Claim victory.”
Plays the victim
“I am Hitler's jews all wrapped up in one person for fred.”
Good vs. Evil?
To:mmmary who wrote (3987)
From: mst2000 Wednesday, Aug 1, 2001 6:04 PM
View Replies (1) / Respond to of 3995
The post I am responding to is a classic example of why people react so poorly to you. Snowman was 100% accurate in saying that the reason people get so aggravated by you is that you seem so intent upon trying to make this a matter of "good v. evil" -- when it is strictly a matter of whether a speculative small cap can make it in the face of countless obtsacles, delays, etc., despite its best efforts and good faith. Your spin is that they are bad people, that anybody should be able to see that (especially since you have so selflessly enlightened us when we all have our heads in the sand) and that you are merely expressing a few negative opinions and shouldn't be vilified for that. But let's look at your last post and examine what you are actually saying -- it may give you some insight into why so many of us are fed up with what we perceive as distortions and misstatements. Here is what you said (in quotes) and corrections or clarifications needed to make the statements complete (and not misleading):
YOU SAID: "ipo company first united ran an astn boilerroom and had mob connections during their marketing of the stock. Managing director of fue is still a director. see sec.gov for litigation release."
RESPONSE: Yes, the IPO company (First United) ran a boilerroom -- but it was not an "astn boilerroom" -- your language (an "astn boileroom") implies without any evidence (and in the face of the FACT that ASTN was not implicated in a highly publicized indictment) that ASTN was involved in the operation, rather than the being an unknowing vehicle (one of many) through which FUE violated the law. You then say "managing director of fue is still a director" (of ASTN) -- what you should say is that "one of several" managing directors of FUE "who was not implicated in any way in the indictment of more than 25 FUE principals and employees" is a still a director of ASTN. The clearly intent of your statement is to lead us to believe that ASTN has, as a director, a person who was up to his eyeballs in illegal activities and was probably connected to the mob. The reality is that Ivan Gothner was NOT indicted, was NOT named as an unindicted co-conspirator, was NOT implicated in any way in any known statement by the FBI, DoJ, SEC or NY State Attorney General, and, based on what is now publicly known about the FUE investigation, appears to have had no involvement whatsoever in any illegal activity.
YOU SAID: "astn stock promoter westergaard sued by sec for fraud perpetrated during his astn promotion. see sec.gov for litigation release."
RESPONSE: When you say that Westergaard was sued by the SEC for "fraud perpetrated during his astn promotion", the clear implication is that the suit was about his ASTN promotion. But isn't it the case that the suit concerned Westergaard's failure to include a legally required disclaimer in promotional activities relating to a different company -- and that the ONLY connection to ASTN is your contention that he did "the same thing" with ASTN (i.e., not include the disclaimer in every post he made to the Yahoo Message Board, etc.), NOT that the SEC formally took legal action over his failure to do so in relation to his ASTN activity? In other words, where in the SEC suit (or action) does it indicate that the ASTN promotions were the subject of the SEC's action? It seems to me that your sole basis for this contention is that SEC investigators with whom you claim to have had discussions regarding the ongoing SEC investigation of Westergaard have told you that he failed to use the disclaimer on all of this ASTN activities, and also viewed his "mortgage the house" reference on a Yahoo message board as inappropriate. Please point out where the SEC has formally stated (or taken legal action) involving Westergaards activitied specifically related to ASTN, or stop saying (or implying) that they did.
YOU SAY: "next stock promoter CCE sued by SEC for fraud and insider trading. see sec.gov for litigation release"
RESPONSE: You might have added "having nothing to do with ASTN" at the end of the statement -- because those actions by the SEC have absolutely nothing to do with ASTN.
YOU SAY: "chairman of philly exchange owned astn shares when he voted for astn vwap approval. He later resigns over the incident. see thestreet.com article"
RESPONSE: What you fail to point here was (i) that after the PHLX Chairman (Vince Casella) resigned, it was apparently determined that he had disclosed his indirect interest in ASTN (the shares were actually owned by Medford, which is a company in which Casella owned an interest and which had provided venture capital to ASTN) to the other members of the PHLX Board BEFORE the vote on the UTTC contract with the PHLX was taken, and (ii) that the SEC cleared ASTN of any wrongdoing in connection with the entire incident. This incident added a year of delay to the ASTN eVWAP approval while the SEC investigated the PHLX (and other regional exchanges accused of similar questionable conduct) -- but ASTN was ultimately cleared and as we all know, eVWAP was ultimately approved by the SEC.
YOU SAY: "current director Valentine's firm Kernaghan has six securities invesitgations in canada and he personally has numerous lawsuits from theft of money from a calp II account of one of his clients, to stock manipulation and fraud. check canadian news articles and US lawsuits."
RESPONSE: Of course, none of this has anything to do with ASTN. And despite all these lawsuits and investigations, TK is still very active in Canada, is still licensed in Canada, and still managed to get eVWAP approved as a facility of the Toronto Stock Exchange by Ontario securities regulators (and, as we all know, the TSE has scheduled its launch of eVWAP in Mid-September of this year). As I re-read this "warning sign", I am struck by the following question -- how many investigations are the 5 largest brokerage houses in the US involved in because of customer complaints, company's they investment banked going south, etc. -- and does that mean that every company they do business with is tainted? Did you read today's WSJ, regarding analysts employed by respected brokerage houses who recommend stocks in which their employers hold an interest (or worse yet, are selling their own positions while recommending that their customers buy the stock)? Is every company that does business with these major brokerage houses tainted because of that? Do you think that they are all involved in the activity? Do you think someone who states as a fct that every such company is tainted has an obligation to determine that what they are saying is true before they publish it as fact?
YOU SAY: "They are getting ready to do some toxic financing from a company that is currently being sued for stock manipulation and fraud. A director in teh company arranged it with the company of another director, Valentine's holding companies. see US lawsuits"
RESPONSE: Well, they are doing an equity financing that could fairly be characterized as "toxic" -- Of course, the "toxicity" of the financing depends entirely on (i) whether, when and to what extent ATG actually avails itself of the equity line, a decision which they largely control, and (ii) what the equity investors do with the stock once they get it -- you apparently think that millions of shares of the stock will be issued while the stock is still trading at 80-90 cents a share (or less), and then sold immediately to pocket 6-10 cents a share, despite TK's considerable existing equity stake in ASTN -- but the fact is that in 1998, with regard to a very similar $18 Million equity financing by substantially the same Canadian investors, that is not what the investors did. So we will have to wait and see whether this proves to be toxic or not -- and, for the record, I think the concerns raised by you and others over this financing are fair and (for the most part) reasonable, but I also think the concern of running out of money is at least equally serious - and in choosing between the two alternatives, survival is, in my opinion (and that of many other longs), clearly the more immediate and important concern.
YOU SAY: "There are numerous holding companies controlled by one insider entity mark valentine which own numerous shares in the company. They have not disclosed the control over all the holding companies. dominican, advantage, southshore, southridge, tk holdings, calp II... cross reference ownership of these holding companies"
RESPONSE: I can only assume that this is an adjunct to your last two comments about Valentine and TK -- but the relationship of TK and Valentine to ATG is well known (heck, Valentine has sat on ASTN's Board of Directors for over a year) and I'm not sure what difference it makes to ASTN? This point, as you express it, is very muddled and opaque. What exactly are you trying to say?
YOU SAY: "They filed their last sec document incorrectly and now are liable for $2M in possible losses from possible lawsuits from shareholders. see latest sec doc from astn admitting to this"
RESPONSE: No, they disclosed that the mistake had been made and stated that this may (key word: MAY) expose them to liability (not that they "ARE" liable. That liability ultimately depends on (i) whether there are actual losses, (ii) if the "selling stockholders" in fact take legal action over it, (iii) if the losses derive from the mistake, and (iv) if they do not have other affirmative defenses to any such claim. The SEC filing discloses the potential exposure, does make light of it (and for what it is worth, it was the one item in the 10K that came as a surprise to me) -- the 10K disclosure does not constitute either a consent judgment or an admission of liability.
YOU SAY: "fred rittereiser was brennan's partner in first jersey. there's an article here about it or go here mary.cc/astn"
RESPONSE: Actually, Fred was brought in to take over the day-to-day reigns of First Jersey AFTER Brennan was in trouble with SEC regulators, in order to clean it up and spruce up its image -- a fact that is clearly reflected in the N.Y. Times Article from 1986 that I posted to this message board. You make it sound like Rittereiser and brennan were co-conspirators in illegal activity -- when it appears that exactly the opposite is true. I didn't write the 1986 NY Times Article -- but you certainly have been ignoring it as you attempt to tie Fred's character to Brennan's.
YOU SAY: "fred got into astn through dover then became the ceo later, for "some" reason. where are the ipo documents? how come only one person could find them?"
REPLY: What's your point? What difference does this make? I have tried to pull up the prospectus from Free Edgar but it is no longer there -- do you think ASTN has something to do with that? And what difference does it make whether Fred "got into ASTN?" through a consulting company in which he had an interest? His involvement, an economic interest, have been fully disclosed in all SEC filings, as has been his relationship to Dover. Where's the smoke? Where's the fire?
* * * * *
Here's my summary. In your attempts to paint ASTN as evil, you are prone to distorting the facts to make them sound far more ominous than they really are. Investigations having NOTHING to do with ASTN are distorted to make it sound as if ASTN is the main target of the investigation. People who are, in fact, NOT implicated in wrongdoing are asserted to be in the middle of it, and specifically in relation to ASTN. You make heavy use of "guilt by association" as a tactic for painting ASTN in a bad light. Throw enough mud and maybe some of it will stick. I know this is your style, because you have engaged in it with me -- you have distorted three years of my posts in the same way, characterizing me (and what I have said on these boards) as somebody vastly different than who I really am (and what was actually said) -- putting words into my mouth that were never there, and stating as fact that I have committed fraud, that I have lied, that I should be sued (while saying out of the other side of your mouth that nobody should ever be sued for what they say on a message board), that I am insane, and many other defamatory things. And when the people who support ASTN and what they are trying to do -- people who have invested their money in the company and want to see it succeed -- get upset at how fast and loose you play with the facts, at the hatchet job you have engaged in here, you accuse them of criminal activity, insanity, dishonesty, stalking and god knows what else.
In my opinion (and that of a great many others who have actually met these people and tried to do more than just "google" them, as you put it the other day), ASTN is not an evil company, it is not a scammy company and the choice we are facing as investors is not a matter of good v. evil. It is a company, founded and run by people ranging from good to impeccable reputation, which is taking on very powerful interests in the stock trading business, which is trying to make its way through a regulatory and competitive thicket to succeed financially -- and which has been struggling to succeed. We have had our frustrations with delay, failure to execute, and the painting of rosier pictures than turned out to be the case, and as encouraging as things are at the moment, we are not out of the woods, and there is still a chance that it will not work out. But if it doesn't, it will not be because of dishonesty, it will not be for lack of trying, and it will not be becuase they have associated with evil people. Most of us (me included) beleive that the people who run ASTN have been working very hard to achieve success, and have been doing so in good faith from Day 1. They appear to be closer to success than they have ever been (see, e.g., increased eVWAP usage), but they are not there yet.
At almost the moment ASTN's prospects for financial success began to improve -- due to a higher level of active usage of the eVWAP trading system -- usage that clearly evidences the presence of some fairly large players who have an interest in using it -- you showed up (along with an entourage of people you claim to have no association with, but who had never posted about ASTN before your arrival) and have engaged in a non-stop 24/7 campaign on the internet to convince an audience that despises you that ASTN is a scammy company whose only apparent interest is defrauding its investors. Lately, you have conceded that it may be legit and may even succeeed, but only if it achieves profitability instantly, and does not take on the so-called toxic financing. Truthfully, I have no factual basis to disbelieve you when you say that your reason for engaging in this activity has been because some people treated you rudely when you got here (and given its connection to your broader mission to stalk John Westergaard, and the FUE situation that was surfacing at the time of your arrival, it clearly was a natural fit to fill out your days and nights, however much your doing so may reflect some degree of extreme or irrational behavior on your part). However, in doing that, you have stepped over the line quite a few times and were sued by ASTN because of statements you made concerning mob involvement, and now you have made it your life's mission to target ASTN despite the fact that you have only a nominal financial stake in the outcome (and a long one at that, or so you claim). And in doing so, you have lost touch with objectivity and fairness (assuming you had it in the first place) -- and when you get called on it, you act as if you are just some disinterested Jane Doe, merely expressing a reasonable negative opinion, and are the victim of a bunch of organized hypesters who grossly overreact every time you exercise your constitutional right to express your "opinion" because you are getting in the way of our efforts to commit securities fraud. Uh huh.
When you distort what others do or say to argue against it more effectively, it is not only transparent, it also reduces the effectiveness of the message you are trying to deliver. If you had come to the message board and said "gee, I know ASTN has an SEC approved system, some reputable people working for them, and that things are looking better operationally than they have in the the past, but if you look at the financial structure, the low cash on hand, the beaten down chart, the terms of the Jameson financing (and some of the problems Jameson has had with other companies they have financed), the problems TK and Valentine have had in similar situations, the Rose Glen situation (and the possibility that they could cause insurmountable financial problems for the company), and the history of delays and rosy projections that didn't pan out, it's no wonder its trading at a buck, and it is way too risky for my taste" I seriously doubt you would have been treated as you have been. We would have argued the issues, no doubt, and a few of the more extreme characters on Yahoo would have been rude, but you would not have been treated by the mainstream long as a dishonest menace -- when you chose to go over the line, and make this a matter of whether good versus evil, of whether ASTN is scammy, mob-related, fraudulent, etc., well, it's no wonder people reacted the way they did.
Yeah, I know, this post is too long for you to read -- your eyes are no doubt glazing over. Too bad. I have the right to express my opinion just as you do.
MST
http://www.siliconinvestor.com/stocktalk/msg.gsp?msgid=16157412
Thanks for sharing those little nuggets of wisdom. I love to collect good quotes.
Sara : )
"Aquasearch, Inc. (AQSE, Trade), was recently chosen to be part of a NASDAQ pilot program, which prohibits member firms from "trading ahead" of customer limit orders that a member accepts in designated OTCBB securities."
http://www.clearstation.com/cgi-bin/bbs?post_id=2459027&Refer=/cgi-bin/drill_open_positions%3FPo...
Sara : )
eVWAP 102,000 X 2
By: stosh_5 $$$
Reply To: None Wednesday, 1 Aug 2001 at 9:52 AM EDT
Post # of 20736
102,000 x 2 confirmed
http://ragingbull.lycos.com/mboard/boards.cgi?board=ASTN&read=20731