Replies to post #5236 on NanoTech Gaming Inc (NTGL)

[PennyWorld]

Skitahoe, I believe Leotxtx was referring to a reduction in shareholders following an r/s due to shareholders 'selling out'. Thus a reduction in shareholders. That is very typical investor behavior in pennyland following an r/s. Then of course the pps capitulates down so it is a no-win for everyone.

Also we need to ask ourselves WHY is FH still dumping MEGA shares to pay bills ....like a PR firm...if he is truely growing in leaps and bounds. Things do not add up right now IMO.

Also how do you figure FH talking about a 'Buy Back' when his actions to hire a PR firm to introduce CTKH to Institutions represents a conflict with that whole concept. Surely FH does not wish to execute a 'Buy Back' while his PR firm is pumping the PPS!! That would be stupid, and we know FH is not stupid. And this doesn't even factor in the fact that FH has been talking about his 'Buy Back' wishes/efforts for 2 years and yet the O/S has gone UP not down. 1 year ago FH told me personally on the phone that the 'Buy Back' was 'in progress'. Is that double talk? Or do we have an incompetent CEO here?

CTKH may be a diamond in the rough. I hope so. However FH is doing a terrible job of reveling any of that to the investment community. Why?

[leotxtx]

skit: hi, sorry for the unclarity

i was saying i felt that a reverse split any time soon, with a negative magnitude such as expressed by penny, would cause a lot of investors, myself included, to want to sell before the probable loss of a lot of our monies

i don't want or see a need for a reverse split, and don't see why one would be needed for even a yr or more after even moving off the pinks to the otc board (if and when cetek became reporting)

on another board, for plni, where reverse split talk occasionally also runs rampant (with examples of jdsu,etc), i also express the thought that no reverse split will help sustain the share price if there are no verifiable current and expected future profits (which is part of what you are saying too)

i just need to look at poor dnap (now dnag) and nngy; huge loss of moneys

the market doesn't care if the share count is reduced, and, eventually,if a company is reporting or not, but only if it's making money; 'course, unless one is an insider, we need the verified financials to know if profit is occurring

i guess i'm saying reporting doesn't guarantee all will be well, but does reveal if all is going well

cetek's growing accomplishments, and i really don't doubt them per se, don't mean as much to me at this price level (almost cheap enough to add), as knowing if 1) the resultant profits are enought to maintain operations 2) not being siphoned off to preferred shareholders 3) large (and how large) shareholders are holding free or very cheap shares they fully intend to keep selling into the market to get their own money back

the company may be making fantastic progress, but be a boutique operation where the profit level will never exceed a certain point because the product is very niche sensitive rather than mass producable (sp); or it may be in a battle of its life with both competitors and it's own costs to continue

or it could be on the verge of fantastic growth possibilities with the resultant profits accruing to the common shareholders

at the current price level, before the shareholder meeting, i'd maintained the bulk of the share price was in the potential, and that had been ok w/me

since the shm, i've reduced the price i feel cetek is worth at the current level of verified information; the growing number of outstanding shares adds pressure on this feeling, and on the distinct possibility that the only way out would be another reverse split, which :-) , i believe, would cause the number of shareholders to drop, at least by one, me :-)

your positive points are points in believe in or i wouldn't even bother with ctkh; we need verifed info, we don't need a reverse split, and we need a lot of good luck :-)

thanks skit

[Orangeman3]

GARY: RE When a company's growing 100% a year or more for a few years it cannot go unrecognized indefinitely. Today CTKH is selling for about 70% of what it was when I first invested, yet it's production capabilities may be up 400%. Sooner or later this growth will be recognized and reflected in the stock price.

Gary you say CTKH is growing 100% a year you must be kidding!! Who said so?? We are going unrecongnized because we are NOT growing 100% a year. If this company was growing 30% a year the stock would be trading at .05 Folks in the know understand that Hilal is a liar and a con man tells us one thing and means something else. You know like PR guy running off with 600 million shares and vendor wanted stock instead of cash and Hilal did a REGDEX. I notice you like these stories, ever hear about his share buyback and within 2 months did a R/S. Hilals number is up no one believes him he has been a proven LIAR time after time.