quote:Originally posted by new2stocks: jenna check your pms
-------------------- "I will smack you in the mouth, I'm Neil Diamond"- Will Ferrell Posts: 4190 | From: Rhode Island | Registered: Mar 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
Does anyone feel like the SEC has our interest at heart? I'm sick of this **** and want to call them right now. Does anyone have the contact information for the SEC attorneys?
Posts: 386 | From: Plano, TX | Registered: Oct 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by frank021474: If ANY trials come up I am sure that an ATTY will be present- specializing in whatever the case is in regards to. As of now the ball is in the court of the SEC to make a case. If they do I suppose THEN CSHD will venture down the path of an Atty (Or at least maybe sharing it with the public...since you and I aren't part of the corp operations why would they fill me in on the status of company legal counsel?).
To sit and wonder everyday who they retained makes no sense to me. The judge was referring to when they come back on 11/7 to make sure an atty is present to represent the company. Since they had NO COURT on 11/7 they did not return with an ATTY.
I am not saying that all of the folks involved with Penny stock companies are golden- but hey somehow they got into positions making 300k+ per year plus stock options.
To think they are running around flying by the seat of their pants as if they run a lemonade stand seems ridiculous. If they need lawyers they get lawyers- to assume they haven't retained one seems also ridiculous.
This investigation is far from over and CSHD + Rufus better get off their a$$ and hire someone . The longer they take , the longer it will take to get the lawyer up to speed on things .
As for the pay , none of the people originally hired are still with the company except for Rufus and the overseas guy . Unless I missed something , all of the others are gone . So who's making $300K+ a year ? As far as I know , none of them even pulled a check while they were there . Correct me if I'm wrong .
-------------------- ----- Game Over ----- Posts: 1536 | From: San Antonio - Texas | Registered: Oct 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
22 and Sherri ~ according to the court documents. The SEC started out investigation in June, so it has already been ongoing.
Additionally, I can point out 20 or more companies that have an SEC investigation ongoing. They continue on with business as usual. There is a HUGE difference between investigation and suspension. Suspension is the "kiss of death" and yet some how we were resurected. Investigation... that was one of two stories today alone that came out of an SEC investigation squeeaky clean. Buck-up lil'campers. We are not dead yet.
-------------------- Una Mas! Posts: 2717 | From: Eville,IN,USA | Registered: Feb 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by TexasMoney: Does anyone feel like the SEC has our interest at heart? I'm sick of this **** and want to call them right now. Does anyone have the contact information for the SEC attorneys?
I just went to the web site and filed a complaint. (I haven't seen the black helicopters yet...) Ohh! living in fear!
Posts: 2498 | Registered: Mar 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by TexasMoney: Does anyone feel like the SEC has our interest at heart? I'm sick of this **** and want to call them right now. Does anyone have the contact information for the SEC attorneys?
Nope. Yep. Nope.
But good luck....
-------------------- Study before you buy, Sell before you think about it.... Posts: 3903 | From: Gulf Coast | Registered: Jun 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by TaxBack04: 22 and Sherri ~ according to the court documents. The SEC started out investigation in June, so it has already been ongoing.
Additionally, I can point out 20 or more companies that have an SEC investigation ongoing. They continue on with business as usual. There is a HUGE difference between investigation and suspension. Suspension is the "kiss of death" and yet some how we were resurected. Investigation... that was one of two stories today alone that came out of an SEC investigation squeeaky clean. Buck-up lil'campers. We are not dead yet.
I'm still feeling fine with this one - just wish it would hurry up
-------------------- Study before you buy, Sell before you think about it.... Posts: 3903 | From: Gulf Coast | Registered: Jun 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by frank021474: If ANY trials come up I am sure that an ATTY will be present- specializing in whatever the case is in regards to. As of now the ball is in the court of the SEC to make a case. If they do I suppose THEN CSHD will venture down the path of an Atty (Or at least maybe sharing it with the public...since you and I aren't part of the corp operations why would they fill me in on the status of company legal counsel?).
To sit and wonder everyday who they retained makes no sense to me. The judge was referring to when they come back on 11/7 to make sure an atty is present to represent the company. Since they had NO COURT on 11/7 they did not return with an ATTY.
I am not saying that all of the folks involved with Penny stock companies are golden- but hey somehow they got into positions making 300k+ per year plus stock options.
To think they are running around flying by the seat of their pants as if they run a lemonade stand seems ridiculous. If they need lawyers they get lawyers- to assume they haven't retained one seems also ridiculous.
This investigation is far from over and CSHD + Rufus better get off their a$$ and hire someone . The longer they take , the longer it will take to get the lawyer up to speed on things .
As for the pay , none of the people originally hired are still with the company except for Rufus and the overseas guy . Unless I missed something , all of the others are gone . So who's making $300K+ a year ? As far as I know , none of them even pulled a check while they were there . Correct me if I'm wrong .
I wasn't speaking only of CSHD. I was speaking of companies in general.
You speak of this investigation and Court case as being far from over- please indicate WHAT future court date you are worrying so much about? Sure we know the SEC will continue to disect the company but since no new complaints have been filed and the judge has ruled on expedited discovery only what else should they be doing?
Do I think they are sitting on their Laurels surfing the internet despite the SEC investigation? Of course not- For you to speculate very angrily that they HAVE no attorneys is just as bad as me YELLING THEY DO.
Nobody knows except the folks in the company. My point earlier was- why speculate so much?
Wait for a court date or something and then check into who the representation is. If for some stupid reason they DON'T have an attorney THEN get angry- but getting angry about them "sitting on their a$$" is unecessary speculation.
-------------------- Got CSHD? Its fun Posts: 766 | From: Washington, DC | Registered: Sep 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
Is that SLJB guy in the picture explaining the advantages of NETFLIX or is he refering to something else. Posts: 957 | Registered: Jun 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by sceptor: I didnt ask for your fears. I asked when do you think sooner or later is. If they cant prove fraud because the bonds actually do belong to cshd, just when do you expect them to run into court proving that.
This case is not just about the bonds . According to the suit filed it has several different things including the bonds . Any one of them can cause enough damage to sink this ship so why not have a lawyer up to speed just in case . IMO , this company is only rich on paper and cannot afford good legal counsel . Also another thing to think about , if this case was a home run for CSHD , I would think they would have no trouble getting a big time firm to rep. them . I think most of the lawyers that have been contacted don't want to touch it .
As for my fears , I'm not afraid of anything in this case . I've already lost 80% of my investment . The only two options now are losing the rest of it or making all of it back .
-------------------- ----- Game Over ----- Posts: 1536 | From: San Antonio - Texas | Registered: Oct 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by sceptor: I didnt ask for your fears. I asked when do you think sooner or later is. If they cant prove fraud because the bonds actually do belong to cshd, just when do you expect them to run into court proving that.
This case is not just about the bonds . According to the suit filed it has several different things including the bonds . Any one of them can cause enough damage to sink this ship so why not have a lawyer up to speed just in case . IMO , this company is only rich on paper and cannot afford good legal counsel . Also another thing to think about , if this case was a home run for CSHD , I would think they would have no trouble getting a big time firm to rep. them . I think most of the lawyers that have been contacted don't want to touch it .
As for my fears , I'm not afraid of anything in this case . I've already lost 80% of my investment . The only two options now are losing the rest of it or making all of it back .
doesnt sound like you arent afraid to me. If you really held the position of losing it all or gaining it all you wouldnt have every post laden with fear based speculation.
Personally I think you are looking to create doubt in the stock. None of your posts have ever spoken positively of them. Thats never found in actual stock holders.
Posts: 440 | Registered: Jul 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
I have to agree with Source. We should have a lawyer... plain and simple, no doubt about it. GET A LAWYER RUFUS.
OK, that being said, there is nothing we can do about it.
-------------------- "I will smack you in the mouth, I'm Neil Diamond"- Will Ferrell Posts: 4190 | From: Rhode Island | Registered: Mar 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by sceptor: I didnt ask for your fears. I asked when do you think sooner or later is. If they cant prove fraud because the bonds actually do belong to cshd, just when do you expect them to run into court proving that.
This case is not just about the bonds . According to the suit filed it has several different things including the bonds . Any one of them can cause enough damage to sink this ship so why not have a lawyer up to speed just in case . IMO , this company is only rich on paper and cannot afford good legal counsel . Also another thing to think about , if this case was a home run for CSHD , I would think they would have no trouble getting a big time firm to rep. them . I think most of the lawyers that have been contacted don't want to touch it .
As for my fears , I'm not afraid of anything in this case . I've already lost 80% of my investment . The only two options now are losing the rest of it or making all of it back .
Actually, this case is all about the bonds. Read the complaint again. Or read my disection of the charges on the last thread. All the stuff about Rufus's incorrect filings/PRs and recklessness is negated if infact the bonds are 100% theirs.
Oh yeah you forgot the third option... "The only two options now are losing the rest of it or making all of it back." or making all of it back and more.
-------------------- Una Mas! Posts: 2717 | From: Eville,IN,USA | Registered: Feb 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by sceptor: I didnt ask for your fears. I asked when do you think sooner or later is. If they cant prove fraud because the bonds actually do belong to cshd, just when do you expect them to run into court proving that.
This case is not just about the bonds . According to the suit filed it has several different things including the bonds . Any one of them can cause enough damage to sink this ship so why not have a lawyer up to speed just in case . IMO , this company is only rich on paper and cannot afford good legal counsel . Also another thing to think about , if this case was a home run for CSHD , I would think they would have no trouble getting a big time firm to rep. them . I think most of the lawyers that have been contacted don't want to touch it .
As for my fears , I'm not afraid of anything in this case . I've already lost 80% of my investment . The only two options now are losing the rest of it or making all of it back .
Ok now you are speculating they have been digging for firms and they have been declined???? Come on! You are speculating again-
You mention "according to the suit filed": It asks for a lot more than the judge granted. yes it does. Did you compare the complaint to the order?
Compare the two and think to yourself- why didn't the judge grant everything the SEC wanted???? The complaint asks for CSHDs head on a platter- all they got was a promise to not break the law and not destroy documents during the expedited discovery process.
Nobody is saying that the legal worries and tribulations are over. All I am saying is you are speaking of this as if we have some sort of ongoing COURT trial with no Attorney and WE DON'T!
There is no upcoming court date! The SEC has x-amount of days to find more evidence. I dont know what the date of discovery ending is so I put X.
The walls are not caving in so get out of the earthquake shelter. This can go bad JUST as much as it can go good. Considering the evidence has been in front of the judge and he denied the request of the SEC once- I lean towards good. But of course I could be wrong and the SEC could hit a home run.
-------------------- Got CSHD? Its fun Posts: 766 | From: Washington, DC | Registered: Sep 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by TexasMoney: Does anyone feel like the SEC has our interest at heart? I'm sick of this **** and want to call them right now. Does anyone have the contact information for the SEC attorneys?
Rufus publically stated this was a trap for the shorts and how devestating it would be with the 6 to 1 share divy. Yes, Maybe the SEC has someone elses interests at heart besides the shareholders. Now I will watch for black helicopters!! JMO
Posts: 115 | From: Michigan | Registered: Feb 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Doniboy: I have to agree with Source. We should have a lawyer... plain and simple, no doubt about it. GET A LAWYER RUFUS.
OK, that being said, there is nothing we can do about it.
Doni... are you not reading septor's points? Do we KNOW if they do not have a lawyer? All we know is that they did not show up for the CANCELLED hearing. If CSHD doen't have one then they had better have one for ANY future court dates. Which currently there are none scheduled.
-------------------- Una Mas! Posts: 2717 | From: Eville,IN,USA | Registered: Feb 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by frank021474: I wasn't speaking only of CSHD. I was speaking of companies in general.
You speak of this investigation and Court case as being far from over- please indicate WHAT future court date you are worrying so much about? Sure we know the SEC will continue to disect the company but since no new complaints have been filed and the judge has ruled on expedited discovery only what else should they be doing?
Do I think they are sitting on their Laurels surfing the internet despite the SEC investigation? Of course not- For you to speculate very angrily that they HAVE no attorneys is just as bad as me YELLING THEY DO.
Nobody knows except the folks in the company. My point earlier was- why speculate so much?
Wait for a court date or something and then check into who the representation is. If for some stupid reason they DON'T have an attorney THEN get angry- but getting angry about them "sitting on their a$$" is unecessary speculation.
Do I think they CSHD and Rufus are busting their butts day in and day out to get this resolved ? Hell No I don't .
Do I think the SEC will come back with something else listed in the current suit filed against the company , Hell Yes I do .
Do I think that CSHD or Rufus can stand a chance against the SEC without some stout counsel to rep them , Not a chance in hell .
As for the 7th , only the day before MA and co agreed to sign the paper work . This is the same paper work that Rufus wouldn't sign before going to court . Why didn't he sign it before ? He says its because he wants it to be legit and show a legal track record of events . Well if this is the case , why didn't he retain a lawyer like he was suppose to do instead of showing up in court looking like an A$$ wearing a cowboy hat ? And yes I am referring to the very 1st setting before the Judge told him anything . Remember , this isn't his 1st Rodeo , he's been to court before on similiar charges so he knew damn good and well he needs a lawyer .
IMO , MA , Rufus and CSHD agreed to sign the forms on the 6th because they knew good and well they had no attorney and had nothing else to show the court . At that point , they knew the Judge would grant the SEC what they were asking for so why not just sign it and save them a trip to the court house .
-------------------- ----- Game Over ----- Posts: 1536 | From: San Antonio - Texas | Registered: Oct 2006
| IP: Logged |
That case was ongoing since April 2005, to anyone who thinks this thing with the SEC is almost over is nuts
Actually, there's one BIG difference- Rufus forced them to take it to a federal court- NOW there is a time limit- that other case was probably all handled by the SEC alone- they can do what they want- In this case a Federal Judge is watching....
-------------------- ..just remember....Family is EVERYTHING!! Posts: 3944 | From: Rochester, NY | Registered: Sep 2006
| IP: Logged |
(1)If CSHD has a good law firm , the firm would control all PR's and info coming out of the company . They would spin anything bad into good and only show the Co. in a positive light .
(2) Rufus said with his own mouth that the share holders needed to start thinking like a big Co. not a penny stock . So why is he still going on SPR and these forums running his mouth . How many real CEO's of real big Co.'s do this ?
(3) The SEC does not have to prove anything at this point , if their mission was to destroy the value and creditabilty of the company so the shorts can cover , they have done a fine job of it . The only way the stock can recover is to prove itself to the shareholders and the rest of the big business thats suppose to be watching it .
(4) This company now only consist of Rufus and some guy in Europe + a sec. that was probably hired from a temp agency . MA and RM are gone and wished Rufus good luck .
Now , if this company can back up what it claims , why are we trading at .35 a share with no legal counsel and a lone ranger for a CEO ? The reason will be shown soon enough and everyone thats drinking the kool aid will even have to admit they've been suckered .
Good luck to all ........ I've got to go get something done today .
-------------------- ----- Game Over ----- Posts: 1536 | From: San Antonio - Texas | Registered: Oct 2006
| IP: Logged |
I realize in your world that the companies are failing, they have no clue, and they think your dog is ugly but come on.
You make a lot of statements out of pure angst towards this stock. Probably because its down in price. A lot of us are in the same boat- some like myself took advantage of it and picked up more shares.
But you DON'T know what the position of the company is regarding this case. As I stated last time you and others were posting about the sky falling and CSHD getting killed in court:
How do you think they SHOULD have handled it? If it was your world what would you have achieved differently?
If he brought the company lawyer (or any lawyer) what do you think would have been accomplished?
Do you think the judge is some sort of bond expert and would have made a final ruling vindicating CSHD that very day? Of course not!
Time to research by the Judge and SEC was inevitable. What would the better path have been and where would it have us today?
The SEC had to get expedited discovery to get into the books of CSHD. That was unavoidable- the place they do that is with the initial complaint. Nothing else has been filed or done.
As much as I like Monday night football I can easily say I truly don't like Monday morning quarterbacks.
-------------------- Got CSHD? Its fun Posts: 766 | From: Washington, DC | Registered: Sep 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
Ok- Let's try this approach- With all the smart people here & the great DD that has been done- for those that are worried about the court case- WHat have you dug up that was "illegal" that the SEC can use against the company or Rufus...I, for one, have found nothing, NOTHING....
By the way if you do find something - can you keep it off the boards & PM it to someone....Bill & Alana are watching ***WAVE*** Just kidding!
-------------------- ..just remember....Family is EVERYTHING!! Posts: 3944 | From: Rochester, NY | Registered: Sep 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
Let me help clear up som of your FACTS? Ha!
Originally posted by thesource:
************* Here's are some facts plain and simple .
(1)(SPECULATION)If CSHD has a good law firm , the firm would control all PR's and info coming out of the company . (SPECULATION) They would spin anything bad into good and only show the Co. in a positive light .
(2) (How is this true? Ever watch CNBC?) Rufus said with his own mouth that the share holders needed to start thinking like a big Co. not a penny stock . So why is he still going on SPR and these forums running his mouth . How many real CEO's of real big Co.'s do this ?
(3) The SEC does not have to prove anything at this point , (SPECULATION) if their mission was to destroy the value and creditabilty of the company so the shorts can cover , they have done a fine job of it . (SPECULATION) The only way the stock can recover is to prove itself to the shareholders and the rest of the big business thats suppose to be watching it .
(4) (SPECULATION) This company now only consist of Rufus and some guy in Europe + (SPECULATION) a sec. that was probably hired from a temp agency . (WRONG: They are major shareholders still.)MA and RM are gone and wished Rufus good luck .
Now , if this company can back up what it claims , why are we trading at .35 a share with (SPECULATION) no legal counsel and a lone ranger for a CEO ? The reason will be shown soon enough and everyone thats drinking the kool aid will even have to admit they've been suckered .
(May not be true. HA!) Good luck to all ........ I've got to go get something done today .
*********** Your funny.
-------------------- Una Mas! Posts: 2717 | From: Eville,IN,USA | Registered: Feb 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
Ok, Most of you know I know a fair number of lawyers personally (and relatedly).
IMO, They should have retained counsel long ago.
The results were well in favor of CSHD even without a lawyer.
I will tell you that if I had retained a lawyer now I would not say who it was.
Now, I personally am not going to sit here and complain about it. Why? Because I cannot pick up the phone and make Rufus do it.
Now I will say that in the SPR interview the other night RPH did indicate it was important and he had expected MA to have already done this and that he would do it shorty.
I am not going to worry about this topic.
just my .02
-------------------- - "Pay it Forward" Posts: 1524 | Registered: Jun 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by TaxBack04: Let me help clear up som of your FACTS? Ha!
Originally posted by thesource:
************* Here's are some facts plain and simple .
(1)(SPECULATION)If CSHD has a good law firm , the firm would control all PR's and info coming out of the company . (SPECULATION) They would spin anything bad into good and only show the Co. in a positive light .
(2) (How is this true? Ever watch CNBC?) Rufus said with his own mouth that the share holders needed to start thinking like a big Co. not a penny stock . So why is he still going on SPR and these forums running his mouth . How many real CEO's of real big Co.'s do this ?
(3) The SEC does not have to prove anything at this point , (SPECULATION) if their mission was to destroy the value and creditabilty of the company so the shorts can cover , they have done a fine job of it . (SPECULATION) The only way the stock can recover is to prove itself to the shareholders and the rest of the big business thats suppose to be watching it .
(4) (SPECULATION) This company now only consist of Rufus and some guy in Europe + (SPECULATION) a sec. that was probably hired from a temp agency . (WRONG: They are major shareholders still.)MA and RM are gone and wished Rufus good luck .
Now , if this company can back up what it claims , why are we trading at .35 a share with (SPECULATION) no legal counsel and a lone ranger for a CEO ? The reason will be shown soon enough and everyone thats drinking the kool aid will even have to admit they've been suckered .
(May not be true. HA!) Good luck to all ........ I've got to go get something done today .
*********** Your funny.
The source does make good points, you can't laugh off everything
-------------------- Disclaimer: Not accountable for anything I say Posts: 6266 | Registered: Jun 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Jenna: HAPPY BIRTHDAY MR.CATIAENGINEER!!!!!!
I hope it's a good one!!!
If I could I would give you some "M&M"'s for your Birthday!!!
-Jenna
Hey thanks Jenna!!
And thanks to the others who also offered birthday wishes!
Happy Birthday Milliam and happy birthday Maumee as well, a day late. Another one of our shareholders, and a good personal friend of mine (Tyraid) has a birthday tomorrow.
It sounds like a GREAT weekend for a big bash!! Id even put my Bday as second priority to CSHD trading in the OTC again!!! Posts: 2308 | From: Michigan | Registered: Jun 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
Good point. We may have a lawyer. That's true.
I don't like the .25 that I've just seen though. Lets get some information out soon that can stop this. 17% down on volume of 146,000. That's a joke.
-------------------- "I will smack you in the mouth, I'm Neil Diamond"- Will Ferrell Posts: 4190 | From: Rhode Island | Registered: Mar 2006
| IP: Logged |
Topic Closed
UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!
Printer-friendly view of this topic
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
We are not dead yet.![[Eek!]](eek.gif)
