Replies to post #1673 on Ziplink, Inc. (ZIPL)

[bnice33]

how can you say the the removal of the information for pinksheets.com didn't play a roll in the decline of the pps? I think it went something like this:

- The fall from .28 to .14-.15 was due to people taking their profits and chasing another play, which is not unsusual at all.

- The fall to where it is now occured this week, which is when wide spread panic happened because share holders were flipping out over the removal of the company info in part because some people (hmmmmm I wonder who) were screaming about a pending lawsuit from old shareholders that never really existed.

Now all of a sudden, you are back in at .4 or .5 or whatever. If everything was so bleak 2 days ago when there are/were lawsuits, the company didn't/doesn't want to r/m anymore, they are losing money, and all this and that, then why would you be back in at all?

[investwise4858]

Krunk and others: Comment on ZIPL

I spoke to Pinksheets.

The word "lawsuit" was never mentioned in any conversation with any shareholder. They (Pinksheets) would never expose themselves to legal liability if they were to ever make a random comment about a legal situation about a client stock of theirs. The cannot do it and would not. Any comment like that could be deemed detrimental to the stock involved as proven out here.

I have reported this incident to an associate at the Securities and Exchange Commission.

The word "dispute" was used, the "dispute" is that Pinksheets added the new info to the Pinskheets company info page on ZIPL and then had to remove it.

The attorneys involved demanded that they remove it as the public had not been informed via a press release about the forthcoming merger.