I have always felt she would be back in the picture. As a matter of fact, I would not be suprised if she is the one who holds the key to propogating the bonds. I think Rufus has kept her in a safe place...waiting for the right moment. Maybe that moment is in two weeks?
quote:Originally posted by TaxBack04: How twisted would things be if Sabra was on the proxy?
-------------------- "If you go the Extra Mile there will be no Traffic Jams".
St. Matthew Posts: 885 | From: Dallas, Texas | Registered: Sep 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by St. Matthew: Would anything suprise you at this point?
I have always felt she would be back in the picture. As a matter of fact, I would not be suprised if she is the one who holds the key to propogating the bonds. I think Rufus has kept her in a safe place...waiting for the right moment. Maybe that moment is in two weeks?
quote:Originally posted by TaxBack04: How twisted would things be if Sabra was on the proxy?
Do you actually believe that a proxy will be sent out or anything will change for the better for that matter. Seriously, seems just like more talk.
-------------------- Disclaimer: Not accountable for anything I say Posts: 6266 | Registered: Jun 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
Well I found a very loose tie from Plano Texas to Vancouver Canada running right through the middle of Signature Stock Transfer, also known as MDM Group Inc. MDM Group Founder Peter Boonen has a pretty troubled past according to a simple google search. Several public legal battles. But appearantly he had a small tenure as Director at a Vancouver company named ImmuneNetwork where he was hired by then CEO, Allen I Bain, PhD who is now on the Board of Advisors for MDM Group.
Signature Stock Transfer out of Plano TX is a company Rufus has mentioned a few times as a very skeptical entity that has supposedly approached him once with an offer to borrow his shares, and was also brought back to the table by John Arlitt when they had a discussion about a TA change from Integrity Stock Transfer.
posted
Ok- guys I'm back.....Listen to this.....I was at my doctor's office, & of course, my phone rang when I was "occupied"...... I just couldn't answer it while I was in the room with the doctor.....
When I checked the caller ID...guess what....that's right.....ALANA BLACK'S NUMBER!!!!
To my surprise, she left me a message.....she's said that she is looking forward to my call tomarrow.......
So I guess tomarrow we will have some answers....I hope....
-------------------- ..just remember....Family is EVERYTHING!! Posts: 3944 | From: Rochester, NY | Registered: Sep 2006
| IP: Logged |
....I want to let you all know I will leave emotions out of it.......
Maybe I will ask her about her gut feeling...good idea Surf...she sounded very nice when she left the message....
I think it would be a good idea if another person calls her in perhaps in a few days.....someone PM'ed me & said they would do that so we could compare notes....I think it's a good idea if we get a few different views....(views isn't the right word I can't think of a better one......)
-------------------- ..just remember....Family is EVERYTHING!! Posts: 3944 | From: Rochester, NY | Registered: Sep 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
And the soap opera continues, let the stock sit and quit posting in this POS. I always wondered why this was the top rated thread all the time. Move on for the love of god. Posts: 79 | Registered: Apr 2006
| IP: Logged |
(I-Newswire) - There is a company out there called StockPatrol.com which publishes a website that many investors rely on. StockPatrol acts as watchdog warning investors of allegedly bad publicly traded companies. But things may not be what they seem.
Analysts are looking at a correlation between StockPatrol’s negative reporting and waves of short-selling. What they find interesting is that there seems to be a certain pattern.
This is how the short-selling scam is suspected to work.
Selling often starts shortly before StockPatrol puts out its negative report – while a company’s stock price is still high. This brings an amount of money into the sellers’ accounts.
When StockPatrol releases its negative report, it initiates a downward momentum. The short-sellers continue to sell, reinforcing the downward trend and in the process bring in additional money.
As the panicked shareholders of the affected company try to get out of the declining stock, the stock tumbles, at which point the short-sellers quietly start buying the necessary amount of stock back to cover their short positions at a fraction of their original price.
The difference they keep as their profit. Obviously, the affected company, its management and shareholders don’t benefit from this. They are the losers.
The money the short-sellers can make on the backs of small company investors must be significant, considering that StockPatrol deals in low priced stocks where even small changes in price represent a large percentage change. Further, StockPatrol has to be aware that through its negative reporting it is actually sabotaging small company prospects, thus removing risk from shorting those companies.
An ingenious modus operandi – assured money making mechanism that is virtually risk-less.
Operating out of his multi-million dollar five bedroom apartment in midtown Manhattan with one bedroom dedicated to the StockPatrol, its sole operator, Mr. Hartley Bernstein receives no compensation for his work and dedicates his time and own money purely for the social cause of being a self-appointed watchdog of the securities markets.
StockPatrol states that its mission is to inquire, investigate, research and report on interesting, odd and unusual developments in the securities markets.
Upon closer look however, StockPatrol’s reports amount to clever derogatory innuendoes by Mr. Bernstein. He gives them a particular kind of spin. But these aren’t simply inconsequential private opinions. Mr. Bernstein has built a following and, when he makes an innuendo to bash a company, he knows it is bound to produce a negative market response. StockPatrol does a lot of reporting. But it appears that Mr. Bernstein has never bothered to substantiate his innuendoes and has never contacted the firms he attacks. In fact, when one brave company challenged him for a public debate he simply disappeared.
Obviously, Mr. Bernstein wouldn’t be shorting himself. Shorting would have to be done through untraceable off-shore accounts and by remote parties without a direct connection to him.
But there must be one connection. Short-sellers somehow happen to know ahead of time on which companies StockPatrol is going to issue its reports. Is it a mere coincidence, or is there a friendly leak at StockPatrol?
Ingenious as it may be, shorting small cap stocks is not only wrong it is actually illegal, especially on a downward trend!
As it turns out, Mr. Bernstein actually has a background in securities scheming, deceit and lying – even perjuring himself in Court. He is no stranger to law breaking.
Mr. Hartley Bernstein is a disbarred New York attorney. He is also a convicted felon. Mr. Bernstein was found guilty of stock fraud and perjury at the U.S. District Court in New York. If you want to spend $25 you can download the indictment and conviction details.
As in organized crime cases, in this case the government used Mr. Bernstein as one of the key figures to convict the others. In exchange for his testimony against his buddies in crime, Mr. Bernstein bargained for himself a lighter sentence.
Mr. Bernstein apparently claims that he is reformed now. Notwithstanding, his background must be considered. According to a New York Times article a few years ago on Mr. Bernstein’s past, some regulators are skeptical and believe that recidivism with this type of crime is standard.
It does look odd that Mr. Bernstein is running StockPatrol – it’s like having a convicted bank robber manage a bank or having and ex child molester work in an elementary school.
Mr. Bernstein has the audacity to make up unsubstantiated innuendoes giving them his typical spin that portrays business people building companies as being somehow crooked. In reality, the crooks by enlarge come from the securities industry victimizing companies for their ends.
At a minimum, Mr. Bernstein, as well as the regulators who permit him to go on, must realize that they are responsible for effectively depressing the stock of the small companies that Mr. Bernstein denigrates through his innuendo reporting.
Don’t these small firms deserve government protection against such attacks by a convicted felon?
While there inevitably must be bad apples among small cap companies, as there are among large companies, it does not appear that the majority of the firms that Mr. Bernstein attacks have done anything wrong.
If there is any wrongdoing by the companies that Mr. Bernstein has been allowed to slander, then regulators should charge those companies. But that is not the case.
A question has to be asked, are regulators looking the other way when it comes to wrongdoing by Mr. Bernstein? If so, what is the rationale? The word on the Street is that certain regulators value Mr. Bernstein and have allowed him to carry on with his innuendo reporting “for prophylactic reasons” to keep small companies in check, so to speak.
If there is truth to this, this would bring into question the regulators’ ethics and wisdom.
What is happening is that Mr. Bernstein, acting as a quasi-governmental representative, is harming legitimate small business, undermining capital formation at the grassroots level and affecting the integrity of the small cap market. He should be investigated.
Understandably, for the regulators securing actionable evidence against someone skillful like Mr. Bernstein may not be so easy the second time around and he may represent an embarrassment. There may be however grounds for civil action by the affected companies.
Investors and executives of affected companies have been wondering for some time now whether Mr. Bernstein is just an overzealous man who acts for no other reason but to selflessly protect the investing public’s interests, or if there is a more practical side to this – Whether there is basis to suspicions that StockPatrol and its related outlets ( Stock Watchdog, Radar’s Doghouse, Stock or Schlock, The Radar Screen, Buyer Be Weary, Know Your Broker, Regulations on Patrol ) are a front for one of the biggest short-selling scams in the small cap market.
What is even more disconcerting is that everybody is afraid to talk about Mr. Bernstein out of fear of retaliation. Even news reporters are shy to explore legitimate concerns regarding Mr. Bernstein.
Posts: 3255 | From: Los Angeles California | Registered: Jan 2006
| IP: Logged |
I have thought about calling her...I will do it. Ask her the some of the questions we talked about today and I will ask some of the same ones when I call. Remember how you word them so I can change my phrasing a bit.
What am I talking about...she's probably reading the boards.
Alena...nice to meet you...Do you approve of, and support the removal of Rufus Paul Harris as the CEO of CSHD; and the appointment of John Arlitt as the CEO of CSHD? If not, can you elaborate a little bit?
The answer would speak volumes...if she gives one.
Worth a shot.
quote:Originally posted by Jenna: I do have some questions lined up......
....I want to let you all know I will leave emotions out of it.......
Maybe I will ask her about her gut feeling...good idea Surf...she sounded very nice when she left the message....
I think it would be a good idea if another person calls her in perhaps in a few days.....someone PM'ed me & said they would do that so we could compare notes....I think it's a good idea if we get a few different views....(views isn't the right word I can't think of a better one......)
-------------------- "If you go the Extra Mile there will be no Traffic Jams".
St. Matthew Posts: 885 | From: Dallas, Texas | Registered: Sep 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Jenna: Wally- that kind of thing sounds familiar- isn't that what Timothy Miles has been accused of?
Amazing how these criminals are now reformed and want to help us take care of our money. The paralell with Timothy is almost exact. Even more amazing is the legions of followers who overlook their past.
GLTA Wally
Posts: 3255 | From: Los Angeles California | Registered: Jan 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Rhyz: And the soap opera continues, let the stock sit and quit posting in this POS. I always wondered why this was the top rated thread all the time. Move on for the love of god.
Cool! Do we get some kind of award for being the best? Posts: 2717 | From: Eville,IN,USA | Registered: Feb 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Jenna: Whoever wants to call should call her....
...maybe Tax should call too....
I won't be able to call until after 10 am.....
Good Night everyone!!!!
I hear you Jenna... I have been trading these pennies for many years and I really can't tell you how many times I would have loved to have a conversation with someone from the SEC Enforcement Division. (Usually because I feel the SEC should take specific action.)
-------------------- Una Mas! Posts: 2717 | From: Eville,IN,USA | Registered: Feb 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
I'm listening to the Rufus SPR show again and thought I'd throw out some interesting stuff I've heard that I don't think has been brought up.
First, a $280 million IPO...This sounded like it would be in the proxy and I assume its the other assets he was talking about bringing on. Simon and Rufus didn't really hit on this much, but Simon did ask about this being dilution. Rufus said to call it what you want, it would be justified.
Second, I know some were talking about Rufus's shares. He said on the show that he has 9 million, but they have not been converted from Wattle shares.
Posts: 1028 | From: Georgia | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged |
I wonder if that was how the 6 for 1 was going to be justified somehow? Maybe, wording like shareholders on th eNOBO list have the first opportunity to aquire new shares with a special warrant for 6 additional shares issueable immiediately.???
Posts: 2498 | Registered: Mar 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Jenna: Whoever wants to call should call her....
...maybe Tax should call too....
I won't be able to call until after 10 am.....
Good Night everyone!!!!
I hear you Jenna... I have been trading these pennies for many years and I really can't tell you how many times I would have loved to have a conversation with someone from the SEC Enforcement Division. (Usually because I feel the SEC should take specific action.)
Tax- you do a lot of dd- I just thought it would be funny if there were someone from each "camp" calling- was just teasing.....I promise I will be neutral......hopefully they have no case.....but we will see.....
I hope she can answer these questions, I hope she knows the answers......but it would be our luck to be more confused after we talk with her!!!
-------------------- ..just remember....Family is EVERYTHING!! Posts: 3944 | From: Rochester, NY | Registered: Sep 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
The biggest thing I want to know from Alana is if John is actually working with them and if there is a possibility that he can get this worked out.
Posts: 1028 | From: Georgia | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
I am sure she has a case. Wouldn't be much of an attourney if she couldn't make a case about the least bit of nothing. It is more a question of strength of her case. Are Witnesses credible and unbaiased? Were the alleged infractions cut and dried? Is the penalty requested fitting the proposed crime?
How does this cases strength and current legal action offset with the irrepairable damage inflicted on the company and the thousands of investors involved?
If they were wrong on any count and their case was not solid enough to reach their ultimate goal (Which I hope was restitution for the current shareholders of the supposed "pump and dump".). Then in my eyes they have failed. I feel they moved too fast. Word is they don't know where the money is. If it is not with the company and Rufus, then they just shut down a company that was not in the wrong, and penalized thousands of shareholders who trusted Alana and her team to do their job properly.
Yes I want restitution, and at this point I believe it is the SEC that owes me. They took their shots at CSHD and Rufus and missed. The company still exists, and Rufus still runs free. I know that I will never see dime one from the SEC or our government for their in my opinion "rash" actions, but I can't help but see by the current activities of the company where the blame now lays.
So no I do not feel the need to call Alana for a plesant conversation. I would much prefer at this point to speak with her boss and get some answers from them. Why was this "shoot and a miss" allowed? But until I am forced to cross that bridge, I will stick with writing my letters to Congress I am getting some great responses from Grassley and Roberts. The Senate Finance Comittee may be getting ready to "fire some shots" of their own.
Oh yeah, and please leave me out of Rufus's or John's camp. I do not like either side at this point. I believe both sides are or have been in the wrong at some point, and I am rooting for recievership or "out and out" vindication. I think that will be the only way I see greater than a dime for each of my shares. Of course this is once the SEC finds the flipp'n money! Posts: 2717 | From: Eville,IN,USA | Registered: Feb 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
By the way... the reason you possibly got the impression that I was in "Rufus's camp" is because I believe he is the one who is being more truthful at this point in time.
IMO, I was not convinced that John's hiring/take over of the company was done legally the night it happened, and I still do not today. Reason? I hold certs and I did not vote for it. Without seeing a list of who voted and their current share count... I can not and will not believe it.
-------------------- Una Mas! Posts: 2717 | From: Eville,IN,USA | Registered: Feb 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by TaxBack04: I am sure she has a case. Wouldn't be much of an attourney if she couldn't make a case about the least bit of nothing. It is more a question of strength of her case. Are Witnesses credible and unbaiased? Were the alleged infractions cut and dried? Is the penalty requested fitting the proposed crime?
How does this cases strength and current legal action offset with the irrepairable damage inflicted on the company and the thousands of investors involved?
If they were wrong on any count and their case was not solid enough to reach their ultimate goal (Which I hope was restitution for the current shareholders of the supposed "pump and dump".). Then in my eyes they have failed. I feel they moved too fast. Word is they don't know where the money is. If it is not with the company and Rufus, then they just shut down a company that was not in the wrong, and penalized thousands of shareholders who trusted Alana and her team to do their job properly.
Yes I want restitution, and at this point I believe it is the SEC that owes me. They took their shots at CSHD and Rufus and missed. The company still exists, and Rufus still runs free. I know that I will never see dime one from the SEC or our government for their in my opinion "rash" actions, but I can't help but see by the current activities of the company where the blame now lays.
So no I do not feel the need to call Alana for a plesant conversation. I would much prefer at this point to speak with her boss and get some answers from them. Why was this "shoot and a miss" allowed? But until I am forced to cross that bridge, I will stick with writing my letters to Congress I am getting some great responses from Grassley and Roberts. The Senate Finance Comittee may be getting ready to "fire some shots" of their own.
Oh yeah, and please leave me out of Rufus's or John's camp. I do not like either side at this point. I believe both sides are or have been in the wrong at some point, and I am rooting for recievership or "out and out" vindication. I think that will be the only way I see greater than a dime for each of my shares. Of course this is once the SEC finds the flipp'n money!
Tax...I like what you are saying. The SEC in my opinion are the ones that screwed us! Everything was fine (more or less) until the SEC got involved.
I was thinking earlier...Could the shareholders file a class action RICO lawsuit against the SEC? Anyone?
Posts: 2498 | Registered: Mar 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by 10of13: Tax? Do you feel better now? I didn't think so...LOl (yes I am just kidding)...
Jenna..look forward to your post!
10 I am so thankful that I and the few individuals... I told about CSHD did not get in deeper than we could afford to lose. (I gave them great disclaimers.) So no personally I do not feel bad. But I can read the emotion on some of these boards and yes seeing other peoples pain does make me mad. Getting to the bottom of this mess should be everyones top priority.
Rufus in my opinon has his hands tied but until his recent SPR interviews I don't think people knew just how much. While John is acting like nothing ever happened, which we all know deep down is going to come back and bite us in the a$$. I just want the SEC to do their job and save us or leave us shareholders and our risky investments alone.
It is time to quit playing, and send someone to jail.
Disclaimer: (By someone I do not mean anyone in particular, just someone who has broken a law and deservingly so needs to face tough justice.)
-------------------- Una Mas! Posts: 2717 | From: Eville,IN,USA | Registered: Feb 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Stockstar69: Tax...I like what you are saying. The SEC in my opinion are the ones that screwed us! Everything was fine (more or less) until the SEC got involved.
I was thinking earlier...Could the shareholders file a class action RICO lawsuit against the SEC? Anyone?
Actually Rufus and Co. screwed us by not handling this business with a specialized attorney .Rufus's DWI attorney doesn't count either .........
-------------------- ----- Game Over ----- Posts: 1536 | From: San Antonio - Texas | Registered: Oct 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
Unless something has changed, I know the SEC feels like they have a good case. One of the things they talked about in court that day was this being a pump and dump. They were looking for the dump though and Bill mentioned Mike's wife having a lot of shares. I didn't think much of it until Mike posted that his wife sold 500,000 shares. I wonder how the SEC will feel about that?
Posts: 1028 | From: Georgia | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Stockstar69: Tax...I like what you are saying. The SEC in my opinion are the ones that screwed us! Everything was fine (more or less) until the SEC got involved.
I was thinking earlier...Could the shareholders file a class action RICO lawsuit against the SEC? Anyone?
It may be easy to read that into what I was saying, but honestly I think the SEC had reason to look into CSHD. I just think they should have been more patient in their litigation so that they got it right the first time. Scrambling last minute to find the funds stolen doesn't help anyone, a matter of fact it hurts everyone. It is like a police officer fireing blindly into a crowd with a shot gun. You can only hope he gets the one or two bad guys who robbed the bank.
The SEC owes me a tax paying father of three who traded appropiately through a certified discount broker an explaination as to why their actions directly resulted in a share price plunge from $1.98 pps to $0.10 pps and there is nothing to show for it. No money for those that lost, no justice for those that stole, and no penalty for the Enforcement Division that ordered the action.
I don't plan on sueing them for my piddly losses, but I do want everyone in the room to know, "What they have done is NOT alright."
-------------------- Una Mas! Posts: 2717 | From: Eville,IN,USA | Registered: Feb 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
I'm new to this board,,also kind of a rookie to day/swing trading. This thread seems to get a lot of interest.??? Can anyone clarify in 20 words or less? Posts: 235 | Registered: Jan 2007
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by TaxBack04: I am sure she has a case. Wouldn't be much of an attorney if she couldn't make a case about the least bit of nothing. It is more a question of strength of her case. Are Witnesses credible and unbiased? Were the alleged infractions cut and dried? Is the penalty requested fitting the proposed crime?
How does this cases strength and current legal action offset with the irreparable damage inflicted on the company and the thousands of investors involved?
If they were wrong on any count and their case was not solid enough to reach their ultimate goal (Which I hope was restitution for the current shareholders of the supposed "pump and dump".). Then in my eyes they have failed. I feel they moved too fast. Word is they don't know where the money is. If it is not with the company and Rufus, then they just shut down a company that was not in the wrong, and penalized thousands of shareholders who trusted Alana and her team to do their job properly.
Yes I want restitution, and at this point I believe it is the SEC that owes me. They took their shots at CSHD and Rufus and missed. The company still exists, and Rufus still runs free. I know that I will never see dime one from the SEC or our government for their in my opinion "rash" actions, but I can't help but see by the current activities of the company where the blame now lays.
So no I do not feel the need to call Alana for a pleasant conversation. I would much prefer at this point to speak with her boss and get some answers from them. Why was this "shoot and a miss" allowed? But until I am forced to cross that bridge, I will stick with writing my letters to Congress I am getting some great responses from Grassley and Roberts. The Senate Finance Committee may be getting ready to "fire some shots" of their own.
Oh yeah, and please leave me out of Rufus's or John's camp. I do not like either side at this point. I believe both sides are or have been in the wrong at some point, and I am rooting for receivership or "out and out" vindication. I think that will be the only way I see greater than a dime for each of my shares. Of course this is once the SEC finds the flipping money!
Tax...I like what you are saying. The SEC in my opinion are the ones that screwed us! Everything was fine (more or less) until the SEC got involved.
I was thinking earlier...Could the shareholders file a class action RICO lawsuit against the SEC? Anyone?
"Class action RICO lawsuit against the SEC? Anyone?" WHAT ? Do you honestly believe that the SEC is the one that caused all of this? Its appears that you are saying that they shouldn't investigate what appears to be a security fraud. The reason they got involved was because of the complaints (regardless who made them) made about CSHD. They saw a CEO acting very strangely and who making outlandish statements on the radio. That is what invited the SEC to do what they did. As you know, I own lots of shares; but I can see why they entered into this. Posts: 557 | From: UpState New York | Registered: Sep 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by milliam: Unless something has changed, I know the SEC feels like they have a good case. One of the things they talked about in court that day was this being a pump and dump. They were looking for the dump though and Bill mentioned Mike's wife having a lot of shares. I didn't think much of it until Mike posted that his wife sold 500,000 shares. I wonder how the SEC will feel about that?
Could it be that they (the SEC) acted before the dump? Personally, if I was going to dump... I think it would have been better with six additional shares to each of my one. Like I said they acted too quickly. Maybe it was a sustained pump? LOL!
-------------------- Una Mas! Posts: 2717 | From: Eville,IN,USA | Registered: Feb 2004
| IP: Logged |
A more verbose explanation is that this was trading in the low penny range, then the then(and maybe current) CEO Rufus Harris announced the ownership of billions of dollars worth of bonds. The price ran up to $4, the faded back to about $2. Then the SEC stepped in and suspended trading for 10 days while they investigated the bond claims. Then it opened back up on the grey sheets, where it's been for a few months, as the price has slowly dwindled down to where it is now.
quote:Originally posted by Spectacles: I'm new to this board,,also kind of a rookie to day/swing trading. This thread seems to get a lot of interest.??? Can anyone clarify in 20 words or less?
Posts: 5508 | From: Southeastern PA | Registered: Jan 2006
| IP: Logged |
Topic Closed
UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!
Printer-friendly view of this topic
![[Eek!]](eek.gif)
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
![[Razz]](tongue.gif)
![[Confused]](confused.gif)
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
![[Roll Eyes]](rolleyes.gif)
They took their shots at CSHD and Rufus and missed. The company still exists, and Rufus still runs free. I know that I will never see dime one from the SEC or our government for their in my opinion "rash" actions, but I can't help but see by the current activities of the company where the blame now lays.![[Mad]](mad.gif)
But until I am forced to cross that bridge, I will stick with writing my letters to Congress I am getting some great responses from Grassley and Roberts. ![[Cool]](cool.gif)
The Senate Finance Comittee may be getting ready to "fire some shots" of their own.
