posted
They can f/s or r/s all they want, still doesn't change the fact that the short position still exists and still must be covered. As Mr. Bill has said many times, they can't treat those initial insider shares any differently than ours. The shares that insider sold to us were of the same class. That would be like saying: "We had apples and sold one apple 138,000 times, but now we want to change our apples to caviar, but the ones you own are still apples." They sold 1 share short at least 138,000 times, and that fact can never be changed no matter what they do or say.
-------------------- 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. Posts: 502 | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
I never heard any response from the lawyers I contacted. I don't think it's because the case is unwinnable. I believe the reason is that they don't see any deep pockets. But that may not be entirely correct due to the financial resources of some of the parties involved. Remember, this involves more than just a little 'ol company from Fla with little or no assets. Unfortunately for us, however, I don't think the lawyers we contacted can see that forest through the trees.
-------------------- 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. Posts: 502 | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
My three-hundred-million shares showed up in Etrade this morning. However, as 379896202 Gluv Corp New. Cannot trade as of yet.
Posts: 7504 | Registered: Dec 2003
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Purl Gurl: Interesting this GLUV CORP "NEW" instead of the old name. No hint of the MAMG name change.
I had those forward split "GLUV CORP NEW" shares for about a week, from 7/26/05 to 8/3/05. Then, on 8/3, Scottrade deleted those shares and deposited reverse-split Media Magic shares. It will be interesting to see if E-Trade trades yours out similarly.
Posts: 257 | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Appears GLUV will get away with ripping off the investment public to the tune of a good half-million to one-million dollars through unlawful activities condoned by the SEC.
Posts: 7504 | Registered: Dec 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
I would write to Sux Cox, chairman of the SEC, but he has such a well documented history of criminal securities fraud, I am sure to have less luck than Don Quixote.
Refreshing to have George Bush appoint a known criminal to head the SEC. I will be initiating a campaign to defeat the senators on the Senate Banking Committee, next election, for their approving a criminal to head the SEC.
Posts: 7504 | Registered: Dec 2003
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Purl Gurl: Appears GLUV will get away with ripping off the investment public to the tune of a good half-million to one-million dollars through unlawful activities condoned by the SEC.
Someone may have made some money but don't you think it has ended up costing the company more in the long run???? They are not trading and this has got to hurt. They have had to have legal bills from this. They have probally lost customers. on and on....worth more than a million lost...
-------------------- If all goes well then great, if not, make it work. Posts: 2562 | From: Louisville, KY | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Purl Gurl: I would write to Sux Cox, chairman of the SEC, but he has such a well documented history of criminal securities fraud, I am sure to have less luck than Don Quixote.
Refreshing to have George Bush appoint a known criminal to head the SEC. I will be initiating a campaign to defeat the senators on the Senate Banking Committee, next election, for their approving a criminal to head the SEC.
ALWAYS BUSH'S FAULT.....
Posts: 2430 | From: CA | Registered: Jun 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
"Someone may have made some money but don't you think it has ended up costing the company more in the long run?"
I commit armed bank robbery, Bank Of America, and make off with ten grand. However, I am caught and spend twenty grand for my defense and do not return the bank's money.
My crime, based on your logic, is no crime. I should be exonerated because I spent more than I robbed.
GLUV spent virtually no money to rob the public for hundreds of thousands. Their only expense is cheap filing fees for those unlawful filings to create trillions of naked short shares.
They violated lots of security laws, they committed lots of felony level crimes, and the SEC does nothing.
Posts: 7504 | Registered: Dec 2003
| IP: Logged |
Both Bush and the senators on the House Banking and Finance Committee knew, before hand, Cox has a record of both civil and criminal level indictments for his involvement in ripping off the elderly in California with a Ponzi scam, ripped off for millions of bucks.
They also knew, before hand, Cox pushed through Congress legislation which favored Enron and Worldcom. Cox setup America for being ripped off for billions of dollars in those scams.
Cox's crimes are very well documented and he personally made millions from those crimes.
Those are only the better known crimes Cox committed. He has committed dozens of crimes, some of which, directly involved favors from politicians, to further Cox's ambitions.
Some of Cox's coherts are still in prison, today.
Bush knew, with aforethought, he was and did appoint a known criminal to head the SEC.
That is treasonous behavior.
Posts: 7504 | Registered: Dec 2003
| IP: Logged |
-------------------- 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. Posts: 502 | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged |
-------------------- 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. Posts: 502 | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Ralph A. Lambiase, a former Marine who started on the road to securities regulation as a rep, remembers when a broker was called "a customer's man."
Companies, he says, "focused on the customer, not on selling products that generate profits for the firm. Now there's a lot more focus on greed, and I have a problem with that because that means you're going to disregard the public interest."
Lambiase, director of securities and business investments for Connecticut's Department of Banking, has an even bigger problem--accountability. "With the big cases, name me the individuals who were identified," Lambiase says. "The company will pay a $200 million fine, but they want to settle the case without any liability, and I think that's wrong. Prosecutors need to focus on who was guilty, even if that means less settlement and more litigation." To federal regulators who spend too much time debating yet another rule, he has this advice: "Don't just sit there for the purpose of creating rules--confront the behavior."
He believes "regulation has become a safe harbor for the big firms" and has shifted the focus away from the individual investor. Over-regulation has also made it harder for the small firms that dominate the industry. "I just don't think you need as much regulation as we have. How about this as a rule?" he suggests to company compliance officers: "Don't lie, cheat or steal--and enforce it."
Lambiase has worked in his state's securities office since 1978 and became head of the division in 1988. Before that, he worked at the Pacific Stock Exchange, where he tracked trading volume to monitor enforcement problems.
While he is light on the penalties ($538,550 in 2004), Lambiase has brought more than a few enforcement actions--69 in the same year. Just as significant is the money he got back for investors: $4.2 million in restitution. And take a look at the case involving LH Ross & Co., a Boca Raton, Fla.-based company accused of perpetrating a classic "pump and dump" scheme. After the firm ignored several administrative orders, his securities division in January imposed a fine of $420,000 and permanently revoked the broker-dealer's license.
Videomoviehouse.com Inc., through its website www.videomoviehouse.com, sells and rents DVDs to both U.S. and Canadian residents. Customers are able to rent as many DVDs as they can watch for a flat monthly fee of $17.99 per month without having to worry about paying late fees. The company has an existing database of over 200,000 customers from DVD sales. By offering a truly one-stop shopping experience, the online customer will have the option to either buy or rent a DVD at anytime. With both options together on one site, the company expects to see increased traffic and sales in both divisions. The company currently has 37,000 unique titles in its movie database.
Publisher Note:
I've talked about VMHVF several times. I know the stock has not moved much up or down since that time, however, I still think this stock is a long term winner. The company has been quiet recently, but I believe that once their quarterly earnings come out they will also start coming out with a string of press releases, if not sooner. I personally keep buying shares whenever I can, and still think the stock can easily be in the $.50 range by the end of the year if the company comes through with regular PR's and investor updates between now and then. I've watched the level 2 quotes and very few existing investors in the stock are selling. VMHVF investors on the stock message boards, particularly RagingBull, are not talking about when to sell, they are talking about how to accumulate more shares which are somewhat hard to come by. I strongly feel this stock is ready to start rocking and rolling with a little news and publicity.
Today NetFlix announced that they expect to have between 3.35 to 3.5 million online rental subscribers by the end of Sept. 2005, and should reach 5 million subscribers before the end of 2006. They also stated that they expect their subscriber base to reach 20 million within the next 5 to 7 years. That is what the industry leader in online video rentals said today and it shows you the type of paradigm shift is going on in the industry. I won't go as far as saying that local bricks and mortar video stores are dead but it is my belief that they will soon be diminishing greatly. I believe that 5 years or so down the line the bricks and mortar Blockbuster stores and similar dedicated video rental chains will be gone and local rentals outlets will likely migrate to stores that are not just dedicated to video rental such as Wal-Mart, BestBuy, etc.
Once the company's affiliate program kicks into gear, their subscription rates will start to soar as will their revenue. Company expects to announce revenues between $3.5M to $4M for fiscal year in their quarterly earnings report expected out near the end of September. This year they will grow their video sales numbers by more than 300% to reach the $3.5M to $4M in revenues, of which 98% of that revenue is from video sales. If they achieve that same type of growth in video sales next year that would put that part of their business revenue between $10.5M and $12M. Then add to that an assumption that they could likely add maybe 250,000 new online video rental customers in the next 12 months, that would be the end point number so let's assume for the sake of hypotheticals that they averaged just 75,000 rental customers over the next 12 months. So if you do the math, 75,000 x $17.99 x 12 = $16.19M in gross video rental revenue and I think that number is very conservative. So, that would put the combined revenue of video sales and online rentals somewhere between $26M to $28M.
Today, with 32.09M share outstanding and the stock price at $.10/share that puts their market cap at $3.2M. YOU HAVE GOT TO BE KIDDING ME! That means that the current PRICE/SALES ratio is less than 1! A typical PRICE/SALES ratio in this type of stock might be 20 which in my calculations should peg this stock at around $2.
Rumor has it that company may be looking at online entertainment acquisition targets which could also quickly add to their revenue stream. Company is one of the biggest online DVD sellers on Amazon.com, Ebay, and Half.com. Their goal is to be #1 in Canada before end of 2005, and within next 12 months be #3 in US behind NetFlix and Blockbuster in online DVD rental market. They have publicly stated that their goal is to have 1 million DVD rental subscribers by June 2006. That may be a little ambitious, but even if they only reach 25% of that goal in the next 12 months they will experience huge revenue growth. I seriously expect their revenue next year to be between $30M to $40M and the year after that well over $100M, and those numbers are without any acquisitions to accelerate their revenues.
At this per share price I would seriously recommend stashing away some shares of this stock as a long term play. I seriously doubt that you will be sorry. I can see this moving to $2+ per share or more in next 12 months. On this one I feel comfortable being way out on the limb! Don't look back in 12 months and say to yourself, "I wish I'd have picked up a bunch of shares when it was at $.10!"
Note: We are not being compensated for this opinion, and we are not pumping this for a quick personal gain. We just believe in the company and stock and are firmly convinced of the future of this company and stock and wish to share this with our members. The Publisher personally does own shares bought on the open market and does not plan on selling those shares any time soon. We are holding out for at least $20 per share two years from now! Won't you join us for the ride? We are pushing back and will be taxiing to the runway shortly, so fasten your seat belts!
quote:Ralph A. Lambiase, a former Marine who started on the road to securities regulation as a rep, remembers when a broker was called "a customer's man."
Companies, he says, "focused on the customer, not on selling products that generate profits for the firm. Now there's a lot more focus on greed, and I have a problem with that because that means you're going to disregard the public interest."
Lambiase, director of securities and business investments for Connecticut's Department of Banking, has an even bigger problem--accountability. "With the big cases, name me the individuals who were identified," Lambiase says. "The company will pay a $200 million fine, but they want to settle the case without any liability, and I think that's wrong. Prosecutors need to focus on who was guilty, even if that means less settlement and more litigation." To federal regulators who spend too much time debating yet another rule, he has this advice: "Don't just sit there for the purpose of creating rules--confront the behavior."
He believes "regulation has become a safe harbor for the big firms" and has shifted the focus away from the individual investor. Over-regulation has also made it harder for the small firms that dominate the industry. "I just don't think you need as much regulation as we have. How about this as a rule?" he suggests to company compliance officers: "Don't lie, cheat or steal--and enforce it."
Lambiase has worked in his state's securities office since 1978 and became head of the division in 1988. Before that, he worked at the Pacific Stock Exchange, where he tracked trading volume to monitor enforcement problems.
While he is light on the penalties ($538,550 in 2004), Lambiase has brought more than a few enforcement actions--69 in the same year. Just as significant is the money he got back for investors: $4.2 million in restitution. And take a look at the case involving LH Ross & Co., a Boca Raton, Fla.-based company accused of perpetrating a classic "pump and dump" scheme. After the firm ignored several administrative orders, his securities division in January imposed a fine of $420,000 and permanently revoked the broker-dealer's license.
posted
Any company or broker with the word "Boca" or "West Palm" in the name I stay away from like the plague. I only invest in companies with the word "magic" in them, lol.
-------------------- 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. Posts: 502 | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Anyone here got r/s today? Many at IHUB discussing it, looks like ETrade did r/s to people's accounts.
-------------------- 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. Posts: 502 | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Well, if the r/s has been performed, that means the o/s is 138,010. The insiders have 10 shares and we have the 138,000 (a short position that still needs to be covered). Let's call a B.O.D. meeting since we are majority shareholders.
-------------------- 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. Posts: 502 | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Posted by: Art2Gecko In reply to: H2NRG who wrote msg# 73640 Date:9/16/2005 3:24:19 PM Post #of 73665
From eTrade: WTF, they rely on word from the company, not any regulatory body?
Thank you for your inquiry regarding the reverse split. I apologize that you feel that the laws have been violated. E*TRADE does not announce a split. The decision is made by the board of directors from the issuing company. It is not the responsibility of the brokerage firm to confirm the validity of the corporate actions. We act on the public release from the issuing company. E*TRADE acts as the middle man. If you feel there is an issue with the split, you need to contact MAMG's investor relations. Although this company does not provide a phone number, you can reach them through their website www.mediamagicinc.com. The otcbb website would not be the best resource for reverse split information. Thank you.
I hope this information has been helpful. Please let us know if we've addressed your questions and concerns satisfactorily by clicking the link below and taking a 30-second survey.
As always, thank you for choosing E*TRADE FINANCIAL. If you have additional questions or need assistance, visit our Help Center at etrade.com/helpcenter, or give us a call at 1-800-ETRADE-1 (1-800-387-2331) between 7 a.m. and midnight ET, seven days a week. From outside the U.S., please call +1-916-636-2510. We look forward to serving your investing, banking, and lending needs for many years to come.
Sincerely,
Emily Lucht Mon-Fri 7am -3:30pm PST (916) 858-5000 x5162 Senior Financial Services Representative Power E*TRADE Customer Service E*TRADE Securities LLC
-------------------- 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. Posts: 502 | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged |
they were only warned about a week before the f/s: "shhh, let them keep trading."
Clearly, a law suit is the only answer. As far as the SEC is concerned, investors have been "protected," and the crooks can't trade. Their job here is done... ("Who *were* those masked regulators?")
Actually, this requires several law suits, with various defendants: the company; the reg agencies and maybe DTCC; and some brokers
quote:Posted by: jobynimble In reply to: None Date:9/19/2005 12:54:30 PM Post #of 2968
After speaking with the examiner in Florida, I found out that no formal written complaints have been filed yet; I personally would've filed but I'm not a Florida resident. Any person who is a Florida resident that purchased GVRP should call Rick White at 850-410-9779; you can also call George Close at 850-410-9805 to find out how to go about filing a formal complaint; this will expedite them going after GVRP, imo. I feel it is imperative for those who do live in Florida to file. Let's keep the pressure on...
UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!
Printer-friendly view of this topic
