Rocky Mountain Int'l (OTC:RMIL former OTC:OVIS)

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Microcap & Penny Stocks Rocky Mountain Int'l (OTC:RMIL former OTC:OVIS)

Previous 10 Next 10

To: Malcolm Thomas who wrote (19170)	11/17/1997 11:22:00 PM
From: Pugs	of 55532

Vital?, I'm surprised that Kuglers' dissection of an old financial has warranted this much chaos.....Morgan told me today that Roland was verifying thru the TA the float and how many were certified. They went to the TA TODAY!!, Chill out!!! Do the math, even if, a big 'IF', thoses 144's come into play, ITS' STILL COVERED!! If you're shakey, SELL!!, If you can't hang, fine,.......sell then...BTW, My sample, consisting of what guys e-mailed me, and dropped by the gym, amounted to approx. 500,000 shares w/ only about 5% in cert form, THIS FIGURE IN NO WAY ACCOUNTS FOR THE FOUNDATION OR CALVARY, the CAlvary alone is waiting for certs on 300,000+ shares!!!! I'LL BE BUYING MORE TOMMOROW!!!!, Pugs

Share	RecommendKeepReply Mark as Last Read Read Replies (3)

To: MZUBOZ who wrote (19176)	11/17/1997 11:25:00 PM
From: Malcolm Thomas	of 55532

<I agree, though, that someone from RMIL should be able to provide this information.> IMHO -- RMIL being unable to produce the number of shares in the public float is *ALARMING*! After all, they have known this was a critical issue for months.

Share	RecommendKeepReply Mark as Last Read Read Replies (2)

To: lavalamp who wrote (19175)	11/17/1997 11:26:00 PM
From: s martin	of 55532

Urlman did the same thing you're doing, as I recall. Surely people don't spend all their time on SI :) Cell phone's a bargain ?

Share	RecommendKeepReply Mark as Last Read Read Replies (1)

To: Pugs who wrote (19177)	11/17/1997 11:27:00 PM
From: TopCat	of 55532

Pugs, Given the amount of CAPS in your recent posts.....and other (Riley, please call me) indicators, I would have to get the impression that you are getting a little worried. TC

Share	RecommendKeepReply Mark as Last Read Read Replies (1)

To: Malcolm Thomas who wrote (19178)	11/17/1997 11:28:00 PM
From: KMT	of 55532

Malcom: RMIL being unable to produce the number of shares in the public float is ALARMING!* After all, they have known this was a critical issue for months.* IMO, it's not that they're unable to produce it, it's that they're choosing not to produce it. It's highly likely that they know what it is, especially if some of the former 144's are theirs. If you were selling into the market, would you want to tell anyone? Cheers, KMT

Share	RecommendKeepReply Mark as Last Read Read Replies (1)

To: s martin who wrote (19179)	11/17/1997 11:29:00 PM
From: lavalamp	of 55532

cell phone comment was a joke;) i will need to track urlman down so i can get some more good links from him/her.it. but i have it on good authority that lavalamp is not urlman:>

Share	RecommendKeepReply Mark as Last Read Read Replies (3)

To: lavalamp who wrote (19182)	11/17/1997 11:30:00 PM
From: s martin	of 55532

The two of you should meet. BTW, I loved the psychic chicken.. :)

Share	RecommendKeepReply Mark as Last Read Read Replies (1)

To: Pugs who wrote (19165)	11/17/1997 11:32:00 PM
From: michael d kugler	of 55532

They're patronizing me becasue they want answers. Don't you?

Share	RecommendKeepReply Mark as Last Read Read Replies (1)

To: Pugs who wrote (19177)	11/17/1997 11:32:00 PM
From: Malcolm Thomas	of 55532

"If you're shakey" ... this is what shakey looks like: Late financial report; promises of merger closings; promises of newsreleases; promises of a squeeze that is just a few weeks away. Add to this list the fact that RMIL could not tell a shareholder the size of the public float today ... now that is starting to look shakey.

Share	RecommendKeepReply Mark as Last Read Read Replies (1)

To: Malcolm Thomas who wrote (19178)	11/17/1997 11:34:00 PM
From: MZUBOZ	of 55532

Malcolm, I think that Pugs has already addressed this issue. However, after my last post I reread HRAKA's report and then went back to John Gault's report this morning. Maybe what is taking so long is the effort to determine how many shares are actually in "shareholder name." That is what Gault was referring to this morning and may be why Morgan did not give any number until that is determined. Only a supposition on my part.

Share	RecommendKeepReply Mark as Last Read Read Replies (1)