U.S Securities and Exchange Commission

   Litigation Release No. 16929 / March 9, 2001

   Securities and Exchange Commission v. Global Telelink Services, Inc.,
   Global Contact Corporation and Robert Smith III, Civil Action File No.
   1 01-CV-0632 (N.D. Ga.) (Filed March 8, 2001)

   The Securities and Exchange Commission ("Commission") announced that
   the Honorable Marvin Shoob, United States District Judge for the
   Northern District of Georgia, entered an Order of Preliminary
   Injunction and other relief against Global Telelink Services, Inc.
   ("GTS"), Global Contact Corporation ("Global Contact") and Robert
   Smith III ("Smith"). The Court's order appointed a Receiver for GTS
   and Global Contact and froze the assets of all defendants. Without
   admitting or denying the allegations of the complaint, GTS, Global
   Contact and Smith consented to the entry of the preliminary injunction
   and other relief. The Commission's complaint alleges that GTS, Global
   Contact and Smith operated a Ponzi scheme that raised more than $10
   million from more than 300 mostly elderly investors.

   The Commission's complaint alleges that the GTS scheme was based upon
   purported investments in customer owned, telephone gateway switches
   offered and sold in units, involving a switch, lease/back agreement
   and buy/back agreement, that constitute securities. The complaint
   further alleges that the Global Contact scheme was based upon
   purported investments in workstations in purported telephone call
   centers, offered and sold in units, involving a call center
   workstation, lease/back agreement and buy/back agreement, that
   constitute securities. No registration statement was filed with the
   Commission in connection with either of these securities. The
   complaint alleges that GTS and Global Contact devised and controlled
   both investments and directly made all payments to investors.
   Investors were not told that GTS and Global Contact had no operating
   revenues and that all payments to investors in either scheme were made
   with money raised from subsequent investors. Nor were they told that
   neither GTS nor Global Contact had operating revenues, that they were
   both losing money and were both dependent on revenue from new
   investors to sustain their operations. The complaint also alleges that
   GTS had looted a sinking fund established to buy back the GTS switches
   at the end of their lease terms in order to purchase a telephone call
   center and to pay the operating expenses of GTS and Global Contact,
   without telling GTS investors that the sinking fund was be used for
   those purposes.

   The complaint seeks permanent injunctions against defendants GTS,
   Global Contact and Smith to prevent future violations of Sections
   5(a), 5(c) and 17(a) of the Securities Act of 1933 and Section 10(b)