posted
He is not the CEO...BUT he still holds an awful lot of shares...which would qualify him as an insider...so yes..he still needs to be careful!
quote:Originally posted by Jenna:
quote:Originally posted by wv1973: You are right frank, the ball is in the company's court. I just for the life of me can't understand speaking on SPR when you stand the risk of violating the TRO unintentionally.
He is not the CEO anymore therefore when he speaks about the company in public it's as if you or I are speaking...It's just his "opinion".
-------------------- #1 Rule: Protect your capital! #2 Rule: Never fall for the BS on the boards! Posts: 8890 | Registered: Jan 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
The original complaint asked for a lot more than the judge ordered in the 1st hearing at the end of October.
I think the SEC complaint asked for a halt on the company and the officers itself. If anyone has it availabe (I can't get into it right now) take a look and compare the complaint to the actual "order". Not just the "minutes" but look at the order. The judge did not grant everything the SEC asked for initially.
The document they DID sign on Tues was the same as what the judge put out in the initial order. Things like don't break the law and eat your vegatables.
my 2 cents- Can't look at the docs right now but maybe later this eve.
-------------------- Got CSHD? Its fun Posts: 766 | From: Washington, DC | Registered: Sep 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by wv1973: Jenna -- the company signed the same agreement, according to the SEC. Besides, many still quote him like he still is a part of the company.
Are you a lawyer?
-------------------- - "Pay it Forward" Posts: 1524 | Registered: Jun 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by wv1973: Jenna -- the company signed the same agreement, according to the SEC. Besides, many still quote him like he still is a part of the company.
True- Rufus is a funny little addictive guy....
-------------------- ..just remember....Family is EVERYTHING!! Posts: 3944 | From: Rochester, NY | Registered: Sep 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
I'm sorry. The TRO did not ask for the company to be dissolved, not even the 16-page memorandum to the TRO. I have all the copies right here in front of me. What part do you want me to post?
At this point the only legal recourse the SEC had was a 10-day suspension. That's all their regs allow until the issue is resolved.
Posts: 276 | Registered: Nov 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by wv1973: That is the consent that RPH signed waiving the hearing and granting all the relief to the SEC that it could legally have.
Now the copany must file a motion to dismiss and show cause as to why or file a motion to answer all the allegations made by the SEC. If the company soes not do either in an expedited fashion, the SEC can file a default agreement and the judge can rule.
Hypothecate a bond... it's over. Business as usual.. or should I say unsual... cuz nobody gets it yet..LOL
posted
Right but the company also asked that the trading not continue until it was all taken care of...and the SEC had the right to allow that (i think they did)but they wouldn't...and that would have been in our best interest!... AND? the SEC should have never suspended trading until they had more proof...IMO!
quote:Originally posted by wv1973: I'm sorry. The TRO did not ask for the company to be dissolved, not even the 16-page memorandum to the TRO. I have all the copies right here in front of me. What part do you want me to post?
At this point the only legal recourse the SEC had was a 10-day suspension. That's all their regs allow until the issue is resolved.
-------------------- #1 Rule: Protect your capital! #2 Rule: Never fall for the BS on the boards! Posts: 8890 | Registered: Jan 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
Legal documents are written in a way for a purpose -- not to be read between the lines. All I know is what has been filed and documented. The SEC filed its side saying the bonds could not be hypothecated to the company. Now it's time for the company to prove it has them. Not at a bbq, not on SPR, not with a trip to Europe, not through third-party postings -- but in a legal forum so the issue can be resolved.
I hope you are correct, but it's time to put the meat on the table and not speak in riddles.
Posts: 276 | Registered: Nov 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
Jenna, I don't know anything about Romeo. Not idea where he lives, but I assumed he lived over here (US or maybe Can.).
Posts: 1028 | From: Georgia | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
10 -- according to the SEC, it does not have any right beyond the 10-day suspension in this instance. The trading was halted because of the filing of wrongful doings by the SEC, it's automatic under their regs.
Posts: 276 | Registered: Nov 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
Agreed! And the Europe trip may be needed in order to allow Mike to get that documentation!...let's get er done Guys!
quote:Originally posted by wv1973: Legal documents are written in a way for a purpose -- not to be read between the lines. All I know is what has been filed and documented. The SEC filed its side saying the bonds could not be hypothecated to the company. Now it's time for the company to prove it has them. Not at a bbq, not on SPR, not with a trip to Europe, not through third-party postings -- but in a legal forum so the issue can be resolved.
I hope you are correct, but it's time to put the meat on the table and not speak in riddles.
-------------------- #1 Rule: Protect your capital! #2 Rule: Never fall for the BS on the boards! Posts: 8890 | Registered: Jan 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by wv1973: Legal documents are written in a way for a purpose -- not to be read between the lines. All I know is what has been filed and documented. The SEC filed its side saying the bonds could not be hypothecated to the company. Now it's time for the company to prove it has them. Not at a bbq, not on SPR, not with a trip to Europe, not through third-party postings -- but in a legal forum so the issue can be resolved.
I hope you are correct, but it's time to put the meat on the table and not speak in riddles.
You know what? - you are right - It's time to walk the walk & I think that's why Mike A. is goin' to Europe....
-------------------- ..just remember....Family is EVERYTHING!! Posts: 3944 | From: Rochester, NY | Registered: Sep 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
definitions:Wallstreet Words - Cite This Source [hypothecate]
To pledge securities as collateral for a loan without giving up ownership of the securities.------------ what does hypothecating the bonds mean to the company? probably a stupid question but??
Posts: 2503 | From: connecticut | Registered: Mar 2005
| IP: Logged |
You are way to confident about this thing. Have you seen any of the paper work? Has Mike Alexander showed you personally that CSHD does own these bonds, is Rufus able to be trusted? Rufus has had a bubble of suspicion ever since he has been in business, what "big" important person wants to work with someone with a shady past? Not many good businessmen that i know. Just because you met Mike A. and Rufus it makes you feel more confident? The guy talks like he has 0 education, and MA has no tact when speaking to anyone. I'm sure they would be given these millions in bonds when they can barely spell there own name. This just seems like a pipe dream and nothing more Mike A. is a failure from a past company.. You guys swing back and forth its like the wind blows one direction and everyones depressed, someone says something that "could" be true and everyone swings the other way and thinks its going to happen... Don't get your hopes up people because if you get burned its going to hurt a lot more. Sit back and wait for a PR. No one here is going to be millionares because of Conversion Solutions Holdings Corporation. This is my opinion... And i was a shareholder for a long long time.
Posts: 127 | Registered: Oct 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by wv1973: Legal documents are written in a way for a purpose -- not to be read between the lines. All I know is what has been filed and documented. The SEC filed its side saying the bonds could not be hypothecated to the company. Now it's time for the company to prove it has them. Not at a bbq, not on SPR, not with a trip to Europe, not through third-party postings -- but in a legal forum so the issue can be resolved.
I hope you are correct, but it's time to put the meat on the table and not speak in riddles.
Patience grasshopper... the truths told will lead the way....
You are way to confident about this thing. Have you seen any of the paper work? Has Mike Alexander showed you personally that CSHD does own these bonds, is Rufus able to be trusted? Rufus has had a bubble of suspicion ever since he has been in business, what "big" important person wants to work with someone with a shady past? Not many good businessmen that i know. Just because you met Mike A. and Rufus it makes you feel more confident? The guy talks like he has 0 education, and MA has no tact when speaking to anyone. I'm sure they would be given these millions in bonds when they can barely spell there own name. This just seems like a pipe dream and nothing more Mike A. is a failure from a past company.. You guys swing back and forth its like the wind blows one direction and everyones depressed, someone says something that "could" be true and everyone swings the other way and thinks its going to happen... Don't get your hopes up people because if you get burned its going to hurt a lot more. Sit back and wait for a PR. No one here is going to be millionares because of Conversion Solutions Holdings Corporation. This is my opinion... And i was a shareholder for a long long time.
So I guess you want us all to "swing" toward your belief that this is going to fail?
Posts: 2554 | Registered: Nov 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
So everybody in Conversion is raising their hand wanting to take over the company while screaming ARREST ME, CHARGE ME, I WANT TO VIOLATE SEC REGS TAKE ME TO JAIL, TO HELL WITH MY LIFE. Is that what you are saying jmoe20?
Posts: 957 | Registered: Jun 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
Nope as i stated its my opinion, and its not meant to change anyone of your minds, just my thoughts on a message board.
Posts: 127 | Registered: Oct 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
On a different subject -- can anyone tell me, short of eliminating my email address, how I can get rid of all these annoying spam crap on penny stocks that come to me each and every day????
Posts: 276 | Registered: Nov 2006
| IP: Logged |
You are way to confident about this thing. Have you seen any of the paper work? Has Mike Alexander showed you personally that CSHD does own these bonds, is Rufus able to be trusted? Rufus has had a bubble of suspicion ever since he has been in business, what "big" important person wants to work with someone with a shady past? Not many good businessmen that i know. Just because you met Mike A. and Rufus it makes you feel more confident? The guy talks like he has 0 education, and MA has no tact when speaking to anyone. I'm sure they would be given these millions in bonds when they can barely spell there own name. This just seems like a pipe dream and nothing more Mike A. is a failure from a past company.. You guys swing back and forth its like the wind blows one direction and everyones depressed, someone says something that "could" be true and everyone swings the other way and thinks its going to happen... Don't get your hopes up people because if you get burned its going to hurt a lot more. Sit back and wait for a PR. No one here is going to be millionares because of Conversion Solutions Holdings Corporation. This is my opinion... And i was a shareholder for a long long time.
Got into med school at 17, not a business expert, but not slow either. If this is fraud, they are a hell of a lot smarter than me.... and all of you for that matter.
Our collected grey matter that presents logical arguements would have all been wrong.
Having looked into the tiger's eyes, he's either honest... or the Prince of Darkness.. LOL
I apologized to the man in person, "Sir, I have tried every avenue avalable to me to prove you're a fraud... I have not done so. My apologies, Sir." -chuckle... "No offense taken."
I did see the ADP CD with the NOBO list names... we had laptops there. So far, there are originals to what we have been shown..... the court has them... yet we trade. Question answered.
quote:Originally posted by wv1973: On a different subject -- can anyone tell me, short of eliminating my email address, how I can get rid of all these annoying spam crap on penny stocks that come to me each and every day????
Hahaha.. everyone gets them.. one of these sites must be the culprit.. but I'm not sure which one.
NO way to get rid of them. Consider yourself infected.
-------------------- Stick with Repo's plan in '07 - FRPT/DKAM! Posts: 6379 | From: PA | Registered: Dec 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by 10of13: Agreed! And the Europe trip may be needed in order to allow Mike to get that documentation!...let's get er done Guys!
quote:Originally posted by wv1973: Legal documents are written in a way for a purpose -- not to be read between the lines. All I know is what has been filed and documented. The SEC filed its side saying the bonds could not be hypothecated to the company. Now it's time for the company to prove it has them. Not at a bbq, not on SPR, not with a trip to Europe, not through third-party postings -- but in a legal forum so the issue can be resolved.
I hope you are correct, but it's time to put the meat on the table and not speak in riddles.
I thought i had heard, and maybe it was during an interview about possibly hypothicating the euro bond and putting the cash in the bank, as a possible way to prove it's existance..
Posts: 572 | From: usa | Registered: Aug 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by 10of13: Agreed! And the Europe trip may be needed in order to allow Mike to get that documentation!...let's get er done Guys!
quote:Originally posted by wv1973: Legal documents are written in a way for a purpose -- not to be read between the lines. All I know is what has been filed and documented. The SEC filed its side saying the bonds could not be hypothecated to the company. Now it's time for the company to prove it has them. Not at a bbq, not on SPR, not with a trip to Europe, not through third-party postings -- but in a legal forum so the issue can be resolved.
I hope you are correct, but it's time to put the meat on the table and not speak in riddles.
I thought i had heard, and maybe it was during an interview about possibly hypothicating the euro bond and putting the cash in the bank, as a possible way to prove it's existance..
quote:Originally posted by madmoney: definitions:Wallstreet Words - Cite This Source [hypothecate]
To pledge securities as collateral for a loan without giving up ownership of the securities.------------ what does hypothecating the bonds mean to the company? probably a stupid question but??
Topic Closed
UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!
Printer-friendly view of this topic
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
![[Razz]](tongue.gif)
![[Confused]](confused.gif)
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
.
