Message ID: 215659
Posted By: stats_for_all
Posted On: 2004-12-22 14:04:00
Subject: Tom Eisenberg

Investor Tom Eisenberg of Open Road Partners, dominated much of the Q&A in yesterday's CC with [clueless] questions regarding Baystar, and where to find a balance sheet.

Tom Eisenberg of Open Road was on the Lions Gate Films CC transcript from 6/29/04. Lions Gate [LTR] is a publicly traded film distribution and rights company. Eisenberg asked about video and international rights retention to "Farhenheit 9/11" and "Open Water".

Edgar has a paper registration filing for "Open Road Partners" dated 10/15/2004. This is a REGDEX filing, so Open Road may intend to become publicly traded.

The Edgar filing (CIK 0001306316) lists "152 West 57th St., 48th Floor" as the address. This is known as the "Carnegie Hall Tower" The only reference I find to this 48th floor address is the "Moscow Institute for Advanced Studies". A English production company "Open Road Films" looks unrelated.

A Gary A. Eisenberg working out of Beverly Hills has a recent SEC settlement ($21MM) for penny stock pumping. No other compatriots listed in the SEC complaint. Eisenberg is a very common name, so questions by Thomas Eisenberg at the newsletter may be by an unrelated person.

In summary, Eisenberg knows how to talk Film Producer talk [e.g. "good DVD rental and sell through for Open Water"], He works in a "theatrical" address in NYC. Little more is detectable without access to the paper SEC registrations.

LTR Conference call:

Edgar REGDEX for Open Road:

Gary A. Eisenberg complaint:

Message ID: 215774
Posted By: atul666
Posted On: 2004-12-22 15:52:00
Subject: Re: Eisenberg Uncertainty Principle

Here's a link to the Lion's Gate Films transcript that stats_for_all mentioned earlier:

www . lionsgatefilms . com/investors/pdf/fiscal2004_yearend_transcript_062904.pdf

Here's some info on the Carnegie Hall Tower, where Open Road Partners is located:

www . thecityreview . com/carnegie.html
www . skyscraperpage . com/cities/?buildingID=188

Now, the building is listed as mixed office and residential. The lack of available info on the company suggests they're pretty small. I suppose it's possible Eisenberg's the only employee, and he runs it out of his living room.

On the other hand, here's another investment company on the same floor, in the same building:

solariscapital . net/contact.html

Open Road Partners is in the yellow pages for NYC, and the address is included, but there's no additional info to be found there.

The point of all of this is to try to determine if the guy's just a random clueless bagholder, or if he's a ringer, planted to waste time and distract attention from the whole Yarro fiasco, and I still don't have a firm opinion one way or the other. I'm leaning toward the idea that he's just a clueless investor who saw the stock spike in the past few weeks. He'd like some of that money, and he's doing all his research by asking the CEO a few moronic questions.

But hey, it's always been my opinion that markets work best if there's a certain percentage of investors who are clueless and stupid, so that there's always a fresh supply of cash for the markets to redistribute.

Message ID: 215790
Posted By: div_2n
Posted On: 2004-12-22 16:04:00
Subject: Re: Eisenberg Uncertainty Principle

No more uncertainty. I spoke with Eisenberg for about 30 minutes. He runs a hedge fund that is invested lightly in SCO. Nice guy. He was very interested in what I had to say about the finer deeper weak points in SCO's case such as the Yarro situation and the potential liability with the LKP.

Message ID: 215814
Posted By: div_2n
Posted On: 2004-12-22 16:24:00
Subject: More on Eisenberg Conversation

Interestingly, I learned something about the funds from talking with him. He asked a great question -- why are the big funds so heavily invested in SCO if it is so obvious it is going to fail? I said that on the surface to a non-technical person that it could appear their claims have merit. However, the deeper you get into technical knowledge of the computer industry, the clearer it becomes that SCO doesn't have a case.

That is, in my opinion, why the funds got in and why they are still there. Darl and company weaved a very tangled web and made their claims sound great. Now the web is slowly unravelling. As another poster mentioned, maybe we are seeing some shares be recalled so an exit can begin.

The texts of these Yahoo Message Board posts have been licensed for copying and distribution by the Yahoo Message Board users "stats_for_all", "atul666", "div_2n" under the following license: License: CCL Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike v2.0.

Copyright 2004 Yahoo! SCOX. Messages are owned by the individual posters.