Allstocks.com's Bulletin Board
Topic Closed  Topic Closed
Post New Topic  New Poll  
Topic Closed  Topic Closed
my profile login | register | search | faq | forum home

  next oldest topic   next newest topic
» Allstocks.com's Bulletin Board » Hot Stocks Free for All ! » CSHD - DD discussion of events (Page 55)

 - UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!   This topic comprises 134 pages: 1  2  3  ...  52  53  54  55  56  57  58  ...  132  133  134   
Author Topic: CSHD - DD discussion of events
thesource
Member


Rate Member
Icon 1 posted      Profile for thesource     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
OH and by the way , thanks for the link to all the legal info .........

--------------------
----- Game Over -----

Posts: 1536 | From: San Antonio - Texas | Registered: Oct 2006  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
66inxs
Member


Rate Member
Icon 1 posted      Profile for 66inxs     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
the docs on the site are as real as they can be.
rufus can't make up the rules in a court proceeding. that bit about not coming to the sec meeting cuz of a gag order by a united nations ambassador will probably really piss the judge off, as well as appearing without representation. read item VII where rufus can be prohibited from ever serving as a officer or director of any corporation publically trading stock. rufus aka paul that is.

--------------------
I'm from Missouri - Show Me!

Posts: 950 | From: Middle of Nowhere, Missouri | Registered: May 2006  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
CRab
Member


Member Rated:
4
Icon 1 posted      Profile for CRab     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
a surfer...

I have this...which is just a modified link that someone posted earlier...I'm under the impression though...after calling this court it's not the same place...

Rufus said he was going to the Russell building...this place is down the street though...I just can't seem to figure out if they are related filing wise...

http://www.ca11.uscourts.gov/opinions/logname.php

Posts: 2024 | From: New Orleans, LA | Registered: Apr 2006  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Jenna
Member


Member Rated:
4
Icon 1 posted      Profile for Jenna     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
Welcome Ett3!!! All you need is right here, baby, * Allstocks!!!

quote:
Originally posted by Ett3Forever:
Ladies and Gentlemen (Fellow Longs),

I ahve been observing everyones messages for the past two weeks and am oblivious why i never just registered to actually be able to communicate. But I finally did that today as you can all see. Forgive me for presenting the obvious.

I am a long and have been since July. Does anyone have any other forums that might be good to look at also? I have been doing DD on cshd for a while and it has been an educating process. If CSHD fails (which i have every reason to believe that it will not), i just paid for a very expensive education in reverse mergers and Penny stock risks. But my optimism is keeping myself and my team's hopes alive. Til further communication...



--------------------
..just remember....Family is EVERYTHING!!

Posts: 3944 | From: Rochester, NY | Registered: Sep 2006  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
milliam
Member


Member Rated:
4
Icon 1 posted      Profile for milliam     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
http://www.digitalislandsinc.com/misc/index.html

Thanks to Frank...everything seems to be located here.

I guess I'm going to have to schedule some time off to make the other court dates!

Posts: 1028 | From: Georgia | Registered: Jul 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
djg7
Member


Rate Member
Icon 1 posted      Profile for djg7     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
This is getting scary. I think the SEC is questioning the authenticity of the bonds.
Rufus had better have the necessary documents
to support his case (proof of ownership). I don't think it was a wise decision on Rufus part to go to court without legal representation. There is nothing that we can do at this time but wait and hope for the best. This is going to be a long drawn out process to resolve this issue. IMO

Posts: 2309 | From: Minnesota | Registered: Feb 2006  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
10of13
Member


Icon 1 posted      Profile for 10of13     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
You are correct, Rufus said that he had been waiting for "it"(the suspension and investigation to go public)...hoping for it...AND? Now that they did...he was not willing to just send in anything...he wanted it hand delivered...in front of a judge and on file...Rufus din't request the investigation...he was hoping that it would happen...and was not going to just send over info...wanted it in front of a judge when it was delivered...that is the way that I understood what he was trying to relay...AND? by doing it this way...noone can claim he didn't cooperate, or that he was hiding or anything else...he MADE the exchange of INFO public and documented...IMO...
Yeah..this is serious...none of it is BS...and all we can do is wait...


quote:
Originally posted by thesource:
quote:
Originally posted by CRab:
He is the one that requested all this be brought to court...all they(SEC) asked for(according to Rufus' interview last night) was a letter stating that he would not break any SEC regs...

He requested they go to court so everything would be formal and transparent...so we the shareholders could see everything...

Yeah thats what I read as well but think its bull$hit . These are serious charges brought up in Federal court . I believe this would have happened with or without Rufus's request for it to go to court .

I'm long in this but must admit , this looks very , very bad right now . I cannot see what the SEC would have to gain by filing this in a Federal court if they did not think it had merit .



--------------------
#1 Rule: Protect your capital! #2 Rule: Never fall for the BS on the boards!

Posts: 8890 | Registered: Jan 2006  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
CRab
Member


Member Rated:
4
Icon 1 posted      Profile for CRab     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
haha...thanks for saying what I should have been able to communicate 10...just didn't come out right in my case...
Posts: 2024 | From: New Orleans, LA | Registered: Apr 2006  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
thesource
Member


Rate Member
Icon 1 posted      Profile for thesource     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
quote:
Originally posted by djg7:
This is getting scary. I think the SEC is questioning the authenticity of the bonds.
Rufus had better have the necessary documents
to support his case (proof of ownership). I don't think it was a wise decision on Rufus part to go to court without legal representation. There is nothing that we can do at this time but wait and hope for the best. This is going to be a long drawn out process to resolve this issue. IMO

Yes I agree , this is not going to be wrapped up in 10 days or less . The proof of the bonds is going to be a major hurdle and just might very well be the nail in the coffin for this stock .

As I stated before , the Federal government does not just whip up charges on someone because they are bored .

--------------------
----- Game Over -----

Posts: 1536 | From: San Antonio - Texas | Registered: Oct 2006  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
mastaflash
Member


Rate Member
Icon 1 posted      Profile for mastaflash     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
All I can say at this point is, if Rufus knowingly defrauded investors, and then walks into a Federal Court to fight charges he can't possibly beat, he is quite certifiably insane. Nothing I have seen or heard over the last few months would ever lead me to that conclusion, however, at this point, it cannot be entirely discounted. Keeping my fingers crossed. [Wink]
Posts: 33 | Registered: Oct 2006  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
BULListic
Member


Icon 1 posted      Profile for BULListic     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
The Bonds exist, that's not the problem. The question is how much, if any, belongs to CSHD, IMO.

quote:
Originally posted by djg7:
This is getting scary. I think the SEC is questioning the authenticity of the bonds.
Rufus had better have the necessary documents
to support his case (proof of ownership). I don't think it was a wise decision on Rufus part to go to court without legal representation. There is nothing that we can do at this time but wait and hope for the best. This is going to be a long drawn out process to resolve this issue. IMO



--------------------
I may be wrong, but I don't think so....

Posts: 837 | From: Madison, WI | Registered: Sep 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
dollar13
Member


Icon 1 posted      Profile for dollar13     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
i will just wait for a cshd PR or a SEC filing


[Big Grin]


RUFUS you better get your a$$$ out of this one and QUICK

Posts: 4112 | Registered: Jun 2006  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Morty
Member


Rate Member
Icon 1 posted      Profile for Morty     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
Did Ken Lay flee??????????? Did Schilling flee??????????
Posts: 106 | Registered: Oct 2006  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Jenna
Member


Member Rated:
4
Icon 1 posted      Profile for Jenna     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
That SOB saul last night said his freind works at the SEC & tried to verify the bond ownership with the Bloomberg site & couldn't find it.... I wonder if this guy is Saul's buddy!!!

By the way, don't worry about this Bull, Rufus addressed this last night something about you can't get the info about the bonds from that Bloomberg system & that he doesn't need to explain how to find the info to Saul because he won't understand it anyway & that he will bring the info needed to verify the bond to the judge...

quote:
Originally posted by BULListic:
Well, I'm long into Rufus and the plan, but this is the part that is disturbing, assuming you buy into that the guy knows what he's talking about.

http://www.digitalislandsinc.com/misc/Declaration.pdf



--------------------
..just remember....Family is EVERYTHING!!

Posts: 3944 | From: Rochester, NY | Registered: Sep 2006  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
66inxs
Member


Rate Member
Icon 1 posted      Profile for 66inxs     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
rufus is not insane, just too arrogant.

--------------------
I'm from Missouri - Show Me!

Posts: 950 | From: Middle of Nowhere, Missouri | Registered: May 2006  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
thesource
Member


Rate Member
Icon 1 posted      Profile for thesource     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
quote:
Originally posted by BULListic:
The Bonds exist, that's not the problem. The question is how much, if any, belongs to CSHD, IMO.

quote:
Originally posted by djg7:
This is getting scary. I think the SEC is questioning the authenticity of the bonds.
Rufus had better have the necessary documents
to support his case (proof of ownership). I don't think it was a wise decision on Rufus part to go to court without legal representation. There is nothing that we can do at this time but wait and hope for the best. This is going to be a long drawn out process to resolve this issue. IMO


You are exactly correct .

--------------------
----- Game Over -----

Posts: 1536 | From: San Antonio - Texas | Registered: Oct 2006  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
SherriT
Member


Member Rated:
4
Icon 1 posted      Profile for SherriT     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
quote:
Originally posted by Morty:
Did Ken Lay flee??????????? Did Schilling flee??????????

Point Taken.

--------------------
Study before you buy, Sell before you think about it....

Posts: 3903 | From: Gulf Coast | Registered: Jun 2006  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
TaxBack04
Member


Icon 1 posted      Profile for TaxBack04     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
Calm down... everyone claiming to have a law degree... please raise your hand. Now slap yourself in the mouth.

Fact is proof of ownership is just that. I own it. Bloomberg is showing people who are investing either for or against the performance of that bond. bloomberg will not show you the ownership of that bond and by the limited power invested in me I deem David an "Idiot" and quite possibly a freelancing crook waving Federal credentials.

Really read the document, the guy is a self proclaimed trained expert in using Bloomberg? Then why does he not know that a Venezuelan Bond is not individually or partnership owned by a single entity? Heck it would atleast be more believable if he was claiming ownership of the bond to be the Republic of Venezela or Hugo Chavez.

His opinion that the bond would not be trading? Oh yeah that is how things work. Boy I bet a non-trading bond would have a stellar performance and credit record. What is your return? 0% Excellent! This guy does not know his bonds and he is the one halting our security so that Rufus can explain it to him.

--------------------
Una Mas!

Posts: 2717 | From: Eville,IN,USA | Registered: Feb 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Chart walker
Member


Member Rated:
4
Icon 1 posted      Profile for Chart walker     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
I hear you all...

Yet all that Rufus has to do is show ownership of the bonds...

That's the bottom line!

How long did it take Rufus to SHUT DOWN Sual last night about the bonds?!! ha~ 2 minutes! lol ~

Remember BIG MONEY'S (the shorts) are in this too. Tut mentioned 525 Million FTD's with the 6/1 share divi...

That's over 1 BIllion dollars at $2 a share, and if they started to cover how long would it stay at $2 a share?!! They aren't enough to cover!!!

"SEE the big picture...."

Rufus first mentioned Bankruptcy for shorts in his PUBLIC attack on TDA, remember that PR?!!
TDA NEVER responded!!..

Now SSSU and PYPR are doing NOBO's! How many others will come forward!?..

Yes there are RICH people out there who want Rufus DEAD for starting this industry secret!! Rufus said he's gotton death threats!

Of course the documents aren't going to be candy coated, but the bottom line is "OWNERSHIP."

Either he has it or he doesn't, and Rufus didn't seem to worried last night, and I think his crack about the lawyer was him being cocky personally...

The PROOF the SEC needs Rufus couldn't make public, who here would post your back account numbers to prove you had $$$$?!!

If you did you wouldn't have it for very long, can you say Identity theft?!! [Smile]

I'm just not worried...
And the price is LOCKED so chill, wait for a PR ~

-that's my .02 cents ~
[Smile]

--------------------
The "BIG PICTURE" http://www.businessjive.com/nss/darkside.html

Posts: 5449 | From: USA | Registered: Feb 2006  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
SherriT
Member


Member Rated:
4
Icon 1 posted      Profile for SherriT     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
Do any of the longs here think this is a scam - really, deep down in your gut - still trust Rufus? We're obviously all still in and all holding - almost hard to know who to trust. We've done the DD, but then we have done due diligence on what was presented...by Rufus. My heart says CSHD is the real deal, but my head is screaming "dipsh--, this is the SEC taking him to federal court". I'm still going with my heart because it has served me well, but I wondered your own heartfelt opinions...?

--------------------
Study before you buy, Sell before you think about it....

Posts: 3903 | From: Gulf Coast | Registered: Jun 2006  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Morty
Member


Rate Member
Icon 1 posted      Profile for Morty     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
Jenna -- I understand why RPH wouldn't tell Saul. Testostogen levels being what they were. But, he does owe it to his stockholders unless he thinks we are too ignorant.
Posts: 106 | Registered: Oct 2006  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
bigstocks
Member


Rate Member
Icon 1 posted      Profile for bigstocks     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
Hey I should get a job with him I use Bloomberg to.
JMHO

Posts: 478 | From: Palm Desert, Ca. U.S.A. | Registered: Nov 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
thesource
Member


Rate Member
Icon 1 posted      Profile for thesource     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
I have never claimed to be a legal expert but have had several (more than 50) experiences with both criminal and civil filings . The one thing that is 100% certain , this filing was not of Rufus's doing . He had ZERO part of it and therefore should not spin it by saying that he requested it to be taken to court . This was out of his hands .

Now , if he does have the proof , which I certainly hope that he does , now is the time to show it . He cannot hide behind his desk and say that he doesn't want shorty or the MM's to see his cards . They are no longer asking , they are demanding to see his cards . The game is over and its time to pay up or collect you winnings .

Its that simple .

--------------------
----- Game Over -----

Posts: 1536 | From: San Antonio - Texas | Registered: Oct 2006  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
NEL
Member


Icon 1 posted      Profile for NEL     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
quote:
Originally posted by SherriT:
Do any of the longs here think this is a scam - really, deep down in your gut - still trust Rufus? We're obviously all still in and all holding - almost hard to know who to trust. We've done the DD, but then we have done due diligence on what was presented...by Rufus. My heart says CSHD is the real deal, but my head is screaming "dipsh--, this is the SEC taking him to federal court". I'm still going with my heart because it has served me well, but I wondered your own heartfelt opinions...?

Sherri:

I read the SEC document, some pretty scarry accusations in there. I too would like to give CSHD the benefit of the doubt based on all of the great DD dones on this site but us longs. Maybe the little man will prevail but I guess we have to wait and see.

Posts: 942 | From: Wisconsin | Registered: Jan 2006  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Sandusky
Member


Icon 1 posted      Profile for Sandusky     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
WTF is the SEC praying for in that doc? LOL

No idea what that's about but it's funny as hell. A federal agency states they're praying for a certain action by a court in a formal complaint.

I bet there's a lot of praying on all sides going on about this company lately. LOL!

--------------------
One shot - One kill.

Posts: 216 | Registered: Jul 2006  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
dollar13
Member


Icon 1 posted      Profile for dollar13     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 

The PROOF the SEC needs Rufus couldn't make public, who here would post your back account numbers to prove you had $$$$?!!




this is a company BUD , he should make it PUBLIC

Posts: 4112 | Registered: Jun 2006  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
CRab
Member


Member Rated:
4
Icon 1 posted      Profile for CRab     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
After reading that letter from that staff accountant(David),(doesn't even mention if he's a CPA,CIA,CFE) it doesn't look like he did much more than any of us as far as researching the bonds...
Posts: 2024 | From: New Orleans, LA | Registered: Apr 2006  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
trade04
Member


Rate Member
Icon 1 posted      Profile for trade04     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
quote:
Originally posted by djg7:
This is getting scary. I think the SEC is questioning the authenticity of the bonds.
Rufus had better have the necessary documents
to support his case (proof of ownership). I don't think it was a wise decision on Rufus part to go to court without legal representation. There is nothing that we can do at this time but wait and hope for the best. This is going to be a long drawn out process to resolve this issue. IMO

sometimes cases are dismissed after a hearing no?
Posts: 3086 | From: miami | Registered: Nov 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
10of13
Member


Icon 1 posted      Profile for 10of13     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
I believe in what the company is claiming...What I am concerened about? The SEC will not view the information the way that the company does.
AND? I believe that there are people within the SEC and other places that are not good and will help the darkside win...bottom line? Money talks...period! End result? i do not think that we will win...unfortuately...i hope we do...but not my expectation...

Rufus? Get the lawyer...

quote:
Originally posted by SherriT:
Do any of the longs here think this is a scam - really, deep down in your gut - still trust Rufus? We're obviously all still in and all holding - almost hard to know who to trust. We've done the DD, but then we have done due diligence on what was presented...by Rufus. My heart says CSHD is the real deal, but my head is screaming "dipsh--, this is the SEC taking him to federal court". I'm still going with my heart because it has served me well, but I wondered your own heartfelt opinions...?



--------------------
#1 Rule: Protect your capital! #2 Rule: Never fall for the BS on the boards!

Posts: 8890 | Registered: Jan 2006  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
thesource
Member


Rate Member
Icon 1 posted      Profile for thesource     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
quote:
Originally posted by Sandusky:
WTF is the SEC praying for in that doc? LOL

No idea what that's about but it's funny as hell. A federal agency states they're praying for a certain action by a court in a formal complaint.

I bet there's a lot of praying on all sides going on about this company lately. LOL!

Its a legal term , do some reasearch on it before you open your mouth . Basically , they are asking something from the court and thats the way you do it in a legal filing .

--------------------
----- Game Over -----

Posts: 1536 | From: San Antonio - Texas | Registered: Oct 2006  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
plni
Member


Rate Member
Icon 1 posted      Profile for plni     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
praying is legal talk for asking.I have seen it many times in divorce papers
Posts: 534 | From: florida | Registered: Feb 2006  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
TaxBack04
Member


Icon 1 posted      Profile for TaxBack04     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
Morty ~ No he does not owe it to us. He put it very well last night when he compared it to BofA.

Would Bank of America display their portfolios? No Is it required for Bank of America to report their codes in an SEC filing? No Conversion Solutions is classified as a Conglomerate, they have the ability to take deposits. If they filed with the board of govenors they would be a fully functioning institution. They are bound by several of the laws and requirements that govern US financial institution currently. They don't own us one thing that could jepordize their funding or contractual agreements with the Caracus Group.

--------------------
Una Mas!

Posts: 2717 | From: Eville,IN,USA | Registered: Feb 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
mnvestor
Member


Icon 1 posted      Profile for mnvestor     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
Good post from H S M:
Originally Posted by some_extra_dough
Please note that the following consists of solely my opinions and is not meant in any way to be considered investment or legal advice:

I have reviewed the Complaint.. First, you have to understand that just because allegations are contained in a complaint doesn't mean that they are true (or even that the plaintiff) necessarily believes that they will be able to prove them.. One indication of this in the SEC Complaint is the following language used with respect to Deutsche Bank: "On information and belief.." That language is typically included when a plaintiff doesn't really have any proof, but simply suspects the allegation to be true... I've included such language in numerous complaints (even though I don't do securities law).. I can also say that it is not unusual for allegations in a complaint to be made that appear to be fact.. That is simply the atty. doing his/her job. Remember, his or her job is to prove their client's case, and you don't get off to a very good start by saying "it may be true" or "it's possible that".. You include very strong language as was done here.

I also reviewed the Affidavit attached to the Complaint. Although the Affidavit is written well, it is lacking in substance.. As another poster noted, it is very weak when it comes to DD... Bloomberg - give me a break.. I would guess that most of the longs here have done better and more in depth DD than the affiant.

I have not reviewed (and maybe it's not available yet) any entry from the Court as to today's hearing... If, what I've heard from this board is true - that the SEC was given 10 days to disprove the info./docs. provided today by Rufus, I think that is a HUGE plus for us.. In my experience, a judge would only do that if they tended to believe the party offering the docs. (RPH) and thought this whole thing was being blown out of proportion (or that no basis existed for the Complaint)... Another possibility is that the judge realizes what is at stake here and is reluctant to grant the TRO without any evidence from the SEC. I am anxious to see how any such Entry was worded as the 10 day period is not typical.. It would have been more common for the Court to have set other deadlines.

After listening to Rufus's interview last night and reviewing the above documents, I am not worried in the least about the allegations being made by the SEC.. I think those allegations will be proven false, and that the SEC will file a F.R.C.P. 41(A) voluntary dismissal of its case in the near future.

Again, all of the above are solely my opinions..

Posts: 559 | From: MN | Registered: Apr 2006  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
trade04
Member


Rate Member
Icon 1 posted      Profile for trade04     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
quote:
Originally posted by Jenna:
That SOB saul last night said his freind works at the SEC & tried to verify the bond ownership with the Bloomberg site & couldn't find it.... I wonder if this guy is Saul's buddy!!!

By the way, don't worry about this Bull, Rufus addressed this last night something about you can't get the info about the bonds from that Bloomberg system & that he doesn't need to explain how to find the info to Saul because he won't understand it anyway & that he will bring the info needed to verify the bond to the judge...

quote:
Originally posted by BULListic:
Well, I'm long into Rufus and the plan, but this is the part that is disturbing, assuming you buy into that the guy knows what he's talking about.

http://www.digitalislandsinc.com/misc/Declaration.pdf


i HOPE that was written by one oh his boys

"works at the SEC & tried to verify the bond ownership with the Bloomberg site & couldn't find it..."

this would be a crucial piece of evidence that the doc was extremely biased. are you sure you cant find it on bloomberg? according to the doc they found everything through bloomberg

Posts: 3086 | From: miami | Registered: Nov 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
mo-rydr
Member


Icon 1 posted      Profile for mo-rydr         Edit/Delete Post 
Thanks Frank & Sherri - M0

--------------------
Hi-ho Momo, awayyyy...

Posts: 871 | From: So. Cal | Registered: May 2006  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
  This topic comprises 134 pages: 1  2  3  ...  52  53  54  55  56  57  58  ...  132  133  134   

Post New Topic  New Poll  
Topic Closed  Topic Closed
Open Topic   Feature Topic   Move Topic   Delete Topic next oldest topic   next newest topic
 - Printer-friendly view of this topic
Hop To:


Contact Us | Allstocks.com Message Board Home

1997 - 2019 Allstocks.com. All rights reserved.

Powered by Infopop Corporation
UBB.classic™ 6.7.2

Share