MATT:

>> Yeah, ask Tom what happens when you do that. Oh wait, he only gets one call. Nevermind. <<

Thank you, I'm gonna be smiling and laughing in my sleep all night over that line. My wife will be suspicious. I'll blame you. Just remember she's a southern girl. The law down here says she can kill "suspicious menfolk" with impunity.

>>only way to do that/get it right from the start...1)forget any kind of short-term gains/pressure to pump<<

Do-able, assuming needed funding.

>> 2) reverse the thing at the same time you get financing, krypto, you in the same entity <<

I'm not convinced of that. Otherwise rational people just go nuts over an R/S. I'd hope to have significant revenues and be closing in on profitablity before having to consider a R/S.

>> 3) reverse it to where you have a 5 mil float at max, 20 mil outstanding, with you owning more than gordon <<

Such a small float really necessary?

>> 4) you running the show <<

Domo arigato gozai masu

>> 5) million or so in the bank
THEN, Harry, you have mojo flowage. <<

From your lips to God's ears. RUB them prayer beads. FLOWAGE is a GOOD thing...

MATT - Hi, just wanted to stop by and say hello, since you were kind enough to email and invite me.

I appreciate all your kind words in recent posts here. Really too generous. You make it sound like I walk on water without getting my feet wet. Old guys like me are happy if we can just pass water without getting our feet wet.

Saw a post where you called me "ultra-conservative". I guess you're correct. But even a conservative can get the mojo flowing when all the pieces come together.

Probably not good for me to post anything substantive. Though I am currently just Pres of a private company, that could change re BTLY, and the world is not comfortable with officers of public companies on bulletin boards.

I will go as far as to say this; IMHO, for at least the next 1-2 years markets will remian very conservative, impressed ONLY by sustainable current revenues/profits. Future revenue projections will be suspect. Current revenues that aren't based on sustainable operations will be suspect. Enron and Worldcom crashed because their current revenues and profits were based in large part on short-term accounting magic, not a sustainable business model. They poisoned the water for everyone. So now its a new game, but really an old game, the focus must go back to basics. Growing sustainable revenues and profits must be the goal.

Any life left here, or has everyone gone?

Kevin, thanks, you are kind & gracious as always.

Some folks may call me a basher, but I can live with that. Back in 1999, I was shocked at animosity I encountered on bulletin boards, but I've learned not to take it seriously. Some mean well but don't understand. Some are stressed over investment losses that they really can't afford. Very few truly know what the deal is and attack anyway, just to defend their investment.

How is your neck, you were hurting last time we traded emails? My kids decided that we had to wire the house to network all ours PCs, so last week I was in the attic pulling CAT5 cable. My attic is a nightmare, so it was a contortion act, I am still hurting. I AM NOT 18 ANY MORE, I DON'T BELONG IN ATTICS CRAWLING AROUND, THAT MUCH IS CRYSTAL CLEAR.

Regards,
Harry

I just had to put my 2 cents in.

"Why are all these things happening? Another Safetypay-Hargens style falling out with Tom? Let's hope it isn't so."

There may be no way to know (yet) what's going on with eConnect Caribbean, but there is a recurring patern regarding Tom's working relations hitting the rocks.

A few examples.

Some of Tom's orginal patents were issued to Tom and Gus Molina, Gus being the young engineer that Tom hired in the early 90's to develop the original "Infinity" terminal (which became the "Paymaster", which became the "EZ Depot", which faded from sight as Tom forgot about kiosks and focused all his energies on the Internet...)

Anyway, as of 2-3 years ago, Gus said that he felt very bitter towards Tom, felt that Tom had never paid Gus money that he was owed for buying lab equipment etc. for the project, and Gus believed that Tom had sold his rights to the patent and had no right to license it to ET&T or eConnect.

In 1997 (?), Tom struck a deal with a fellow named Jim Torres. Jim invested a chunk of money in ET&T, and became active in management (President?). Jim and Tom quickly had a falling out, eventually Jim filed a lawsuit. A quiet out-of-court settlement occured in 2000?

In 1999, the SafeTPay fiasco.

Also in 1999, threats of lawsuits flew back and forth over the "Thundergo" software deal that was announced but led nowhere. That was a falling out between Tom, Paul Egan, and someone in Chicago named Bob Jeddick. I don't recall hearing of any resolution.

Now, it looks like Paul Egan is distancing himself from Tom as fast as possible.

It's the same story over and over. Peple find that they can't work with Tom, and/or they feel that they've been taken advantage of, and they walk away.