-------------------- My posts are my opinion only, and should not be construed as a recommendation to buy, sell, or hold any security. Do your own due dilligence.
IP: Logged |
quote:Posted by: Rocket Blasters In reply to: jobynimble who wrote msg# 63608 Date:6/17/2005 12:56:12 PM Post #of 63610
This is in follow-up to the E-Mail sent to you on June 16, 2005 and your E-Mails of June 15 and June 17, 2005 regarding Gluv Corp. (GVRP).
After conducting a preliminary review of this matter, we are referring your complaint to the Securities and Exchange Commission as follows:
Mr. Aldis Lapins, Branch Chief Office of Investor Education and Assistance Securities and Exchange Commission 450 Fifth Street, NW, Mail Stop 11-4 Washington, DC 20549 (202) 942-4681 www.sec.gov
Thank you for bringing your concerns to our attention.
If I can be of assistance in the future, please contact me at (240) 386-5105 or through E-Mail at pat.clem@nasd.com.
posted
Hot potato, just keep passing it round and round indefinitely. This is BS, I really hope some Senators or Reps get involved, they can't just keep letting this go and doing nothing. I'm still demanding a buy-in, nothing has changed, IMO from where we were 3 weeks ago.
-------------------- My posts are my opinion only, and should not be construed as a recommendation to buy, sell, or hold any security. Do your own due dilligence.
IP: Logged |
quote:Posted by: Rocket Blasters In reply to: Rocket Blasters who wrote msg# 63610 Date:6/17/2005 1:15:10 PM Post #of 63633
new number 202-551-6336
Mr. Aldis Lapins, Branch Chief Office of Investor Education and Assistance Securities and Exchange Commission 450 Fifth Street, NW, Mail Stop 11-4 Washington, DC 20549
quote:The Firms are concerned about the potential impact of net capital charges under Rule 15~3-1 related to transactions in the Security. Specifically, the Firms may be subject to failed to deliver, failed to receive, and short position net capital charges. Based on the foregoing, the Division of Market Regulation will not recommend enforcement action to the Commission if a Firm does not take charges to its net capital arising from transactions in the Security that the Firm entered into before the Trading Halt. Each Firm, however, must take all applicable net capital charges for transactions in the Security entered into after the Trading Halt terminated. Any Firm that wishes to take advantage of this relief first must alert the staff of the NASD and explain the facts and circumstances surrounding its need for the relief that this letter provides.
so this means brokers off the hook for trades before the halt?
-------------------- Nashoba Holba Chepulechi Adventures in microcapitalism...
IP: Logged |
posted
Also means that people who sold before the halt are off the hook.
I like this line:
____________ 2 We understand that Gluv has changed its name to Media Magic, Inc., but we have not received formal confirmation of this change. _____________
You mean that GLVU, GVRP, ???? didn't inform the SEC that they had changed their name. Imagine that!
IP: Logged |
yup, I think you're seeing different versions of the "Special Notice to Members" we went through, well, starting with the one that effectively stopped broker trading. I still don't know who was trading Monday and Tuesday...
-------------------- Nashoba Holba Chepulechi Adventures in microcapitalism...
IP: Logged |
posted
All I know is I picked up 50,000 on Tuesday...... To whom sold them to me... that is what we need to find out.
According to scottrade there are still only 11 shares of this company, and until the SEC gives their "ruling" Scottrade will not issue my f/s shares....
IP: Logged |
posted
I haven't really had time to digest the new info from today. After a first read through, looks like brokers seeking relief for them and their clients? People who sold post split shares may be OK? I need to look over it in more detail, my brain is fried right now, I can't understand anything, I'm stupid right now.
-------------------- My posts are my opinion only, and should not be construed as a recommendation to buy, sell, or hold any security. Do your own due dilligence.
IP: Logged |
posted
Never mind, I re read it, I don't think it really means much, just maybe means things will finally start to get sorted out soon. Nothing definitive in there for investors, only brokers trying not to get stung until this gets figured out.
-------------------- My posts are my opinion only, and should not be construed as a recommendation to buy, sell, or hold any security. Do your own due dilligence.
IP: Logged |
posted
"The SEC issued this suspension because of questions surrounding the accuracy and adequacy of publicly disseminated information concerning, among other things, the total shares outstanding, the availability of non-restricted shares for trading and delivery, THE COMPANY'S SHAREHOLDERS, and rights with respect to shares of Gluv Corporation."
Well, we know who the company's shareholders are....US!!!
-------------------- My posts are my opinion only, and should not be construed as a recommendation to buy, sell, or hold any security. Do your own due dilligence.
IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by glassman: hey, Wall Street!
Is that Robert Pearce?
-------------------- My posts are my opinion only, and should not be construed as a recommendation to buy, sell, or hold any security. Do your own due dilligence.
IP: Logged |
For me, I am enjoying plowing under Wall Street. Been ranting for years, and now sweet revenge.
Positive is hundreds of people have been hounding all the regulatory bodies, attorneys, executives, even politicians. Doing so places those people on notice there a lot of traders out here watching and waiting for a chance to pounce on them.
They will not forget these events. GLUV, Pearce, his transfer agent, will never forget. All of those people we have trashed will maintain a small memory of this and, perhaps, will be more cautious in the future.
Most noteworthy event is highlighting a serious problem of naked shorting, and all of us were naked shorters during this. Next time the SEC claims naked shorting is not a problem, there will be many who know better.
Lots of learning about technical aspects of the stock markets has been had as well.
Those directly involved in this circus, those following along, all are now more of a threat to those Wall Street crooks; we have the power of knowledge.
Watch your step, Wall Street. We are watching.
IP: Logged |
Any future ventures by them will be tainted by this history of GLUV corporation.
"Oh, you are investing in a Pearce project? Have I told you about the GLUV scandal? Well, sit back and listen to a very entertaining story."
IP: Logged |
quote:The Firms are concerned about the potential impact of net capital charges under Rule 15~3-1 related to transactions in the Security. Specifically, the Firms may be subject to failed to deliver, failed to receive, and short position net capital charges. Based on the foregoing, the Division of Market Regulation will not recommend enforcement action to the Commission if a Firm does not take charges to its net capital arising from transactions in the Security that the Firm entered into before the Trading Halt. Each Firm, however, must take all applicable net capital charges for transactions in the Security entered into after the Trading Halt terminated. Any Firm that wishes to take advantage of this relief first must alert the staff of the NASD and explain the facts and circumstances surrounding its need for the relief that this letter provides. This position is based solely on the foregoing description. Factual variations could warrant a different response, and any material change in the facts must be brought to the Division's attention. This position may be withdrawn or modified if the staff determines that such action is necessary for the protection of investors, in the public interest, or otherwise in furtherance of the securities laws.
I like the "protection of investors" part.
IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by BuyTex: about a man, named Jed,
"which you aint, parking-lot, box-top toy,"
hey, be gentle--remember i'm new--is it fair to postulate a general rise in "trader IQ" since online trading has taken hold?
Yes, I do believe my IQ has risen substantially from all this, hehe.
-------------------- My posts are my opinion only, and should not be construed as a recommendation to buy, sell, or hold any security. Do your own due dilligence.
IP: Logged |
posted
[quoteThis position may be withdrawn or modified if the staff determines that such action is necessary for the protection of investors, in the public interest, or otherwise in furtherance of the securities laws.
I say we determine whether this ruling lets them off the hook to fix the failure to deliver (NASD tells me it does *not,* saying it simply relieves them of proprotions/liquidity required by Net Capital rule, but then they added "it's one of the most complex of all the regs").
If this *does* take them off the hook, we need to protest on grounds that the two highlighted provisions are being plundered, not merely ignored...
-------------------- Nashoba Holba Chepulechi Adventures in microcapitalism...
IP: Logged |
posted
Funny meaning 'not right' or just plain funny?
-------------------- My posts are my opinion only, and should not be construed as a recommendation to buy, sell, or hold any security. Do your own due dilligence.
IP: Logged |
posted
The real question here IMO is with an OS of 33M REGISTERED shares who can/will shares associated with Due Bills be delivered ?
One can easily argue the REGISTERED OS has already been exceeded enormously, if the IOUs / Due Bills sold via AT "stick". AT let folks sell their IOUs.
To allow shares associated with Due Bills to be delivered would far exceed the REGISTERED OS.
quote:Regarding Gluv, ticker GVRP. We appreciate your concern and understand your frustration.
At this time Scottrade has not received forward split shares. To our knowledge there has been no ruling in this matter by any Regulatory Organization. DTC has not effected the split or distributed new shares as the result of a stock split. We have not been provided any information as to when this might be resolved.
In this case, Scottrade will not post shares until such time as we receive shares. Under these circumstances Scottrade has made the business decision that the risk is too great to allow a short position in GVRP as the result of allowing customers to sell shares that they don't have in their account.
At this time we would suggest that customers contact the Company itself regarding any new information they may have.
UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!
Printer-friendly view of this topic
