InvestorsHub Logo
icon url

turbosig

09/29/09 9:16 PM

#1261 RE: EDWARD STEVENSON #1258

Don't get me wrong, I'm here for the opportunity.

I personally think it is fabulous that any comments made (by me of course) are refuted or acknowledged with facts and optimism.

When I first caught wind of WLSA, I'll admit that all I saw was a CEO of a failed mobile company now running a soon to be plasma gasification business.

As a former colleague of a serial entrepreneur and knowing my own path taken in life (jumping industry to industry) I slowly gained interest.

I know the OS did increase, I know the share price has suffered lately and I know there haven't been any updates and without a logical explanation you certainly have to admit it's a question worth asking.

Now all that being said, I did pick up an additional 30k shares through this drop, not because I think everything mentioned above smells fishy, but rather what hasn't happened.

No significant dilution, Plasma gasification does sound interesting, no flooding PR's driving the price higher, and on and on. I'll admit, this could be the real deal and IMO you NEVER STOP ASKING QUESTIONS, nor should their ever come a time when you simply "except" what is stated, but....

Sometime you gotta go with your gut and since I don't see any real red flags thus far (seems the CEO has been pretty straight forward and never really over hyped) and you can't always call a pps drop a red flag IMO.

I'll look for good things to come in the future and certainly wish all the best in the re-birth of Wireless Age.
icon url

zabone

09/30/09 9:41 AM

#1262 RE: EDWARD STEVENSON #1258

Ed, Had you heard any rumors out there that there may be a unexpected settlement from Sastel for the way they initiated the receivership of WLSA last year? I spoke with JS when this crap all started and he indicated that they were violating or at least exceeding the parameters for what and when a receivership can be initiated. Rumor has it that Sastel realized they were wrong as well as the original judgement by the court approving the receivership and they do not want to take this to the appeals court. Have you heard anything? Best regards.