posted
a number of you are stating that you have buy orders in - has anyone been able to sell? and has it been hard to get those orders to go through? what type of asking price have you put out relative to the PPS at the time?
Posts: 603 | From: Plymouth, MN | Registered: Jun 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
I had to call Scotty (since there are no market makers) and placed a good till cancel order at .20. That was several days ago and the price is flying up and down but my buy never hit. It should hit tomorrow (and with my luck will keep dropping). LOL
Posts: 2498 | Registered: Mar 2006
| IP: Logged |
"If completed, Perihelion will attempt to become one of the first pinksheet companies to succeed in not only convincing the public of a substantial asset base, but also to avoid the regulatory fate of such recent companies like Conversion Solutions Holdings Corp (OTC: CSHD)."
-------------------- All post are my opinion. Do your own DD. Who's clicking your buy/sell button!? Posts: 7800 | From: Virginia | Registered: May 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
I'm finally listening to the SPR show from the other night. I still can't believe that the TA does all of the filings for the company. Rufus said that he couldn't get the codes to file the stuff and had to go through the TA (Don). WTF's up with that? He also seems to feel like Don is now in kahoots (sp?) with John, since John was able to file the 8K. Did John get the codes himself or did he go through Don as well?
Interesting stuff. Listening to Rufus makes me feel better about him. He knows this stuff! I'm not finished with the show yet, so maybe it gets worse later on.
Posts: 1028 | From: Georgia | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
The SEC filed a complaint to shut the doors on CSHD and have them banned from future jobs as officers in any corp. The judge did not rule in favor of what the SEC was going for in the original complaint-
You can compare the complaint with the order to see what the SEC did not get as originally intended.------------------------------------------- what i seem to remember reading in the original complaint was that RPH as CEO alledgedly made false or missleading statements about the companies assets, the action resulted in a standard 10 day suspension while RPH and co. ansered the complaint. they were not at the point where they were looking to close the doors on the company and that may still happen. the fact that the stock trades on the grey sheets does not validate the assets, nothing so far has done this to the satisfaction of the SEC( or why would they be preparing a lawsuit!), the company should have settled this already IF they own the claimed assets. again how hard can it possibly be to prove this!!!! not a single possitive event has transpired since the suspension was lifted! not one!! every negative developement has been spun in every concievable way to twist them into a possitive yet we still trade on greys and the price continues to decline! with no end in site. our former CEO spent the day in court. our former BOD resigned our new CFO will not take the job without D and O insurance to cover his AZZ not if but WHEN this company gets sued!!! niether "spin" nor wishful thinking will save this company, without credibal varifiable and completely accurate info BY THE COMPANY we will be at .05 by friday!! thats the way I see it. GLTA!!! we realy need it!!!
Posts: 2503 | From: connecticut | Registered: Mar 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
I think that the final paragraph in the FHAL/CSHD saga will be written this week. I lost 6K on this mess. I really feel for those who bought a ton of shares and had the opportunity to sell for a big profit - and didn't because of Rufus's lies and pumping. Or those who bought over $2.
RPH and Ben should do time for the mayhem they have caused.
Posts: 630 | Registered: Jun 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by madmoney: The SEC filed a complaint to shut the doors on CSHD and have them banned from future jobs as officers in any corp. The judge did not rule in favor of what the SEC was going for in the original complaint-
You can compare the complaint with the order to see what the SEC did not get as originally intended.------------------------------------------- what i seem to remember reading in the original complaint was that RPH as CEO alledgedly made false or missleading statements about the companies assets, the action resulted in a standard 10 day suspension while RPH and co. ansered the complaint. they were not at the point where they were looking to close the doors on the company and that may still happen. the fact that the stock trades on the grey sheets does not validate the assets, nothing so far has done this to the satisfaction of the SEC( or why would they be preparing a lawsuit!), the company should have settled this already IF they own the claimed assets. again how hard can it possibly be to prove this!!!! not a single possitive event has transpired since the suspension was lifted! not one!! every negative developement has been spun in every concievable way to twist them into a possitive yet we still trade on greys and the price continues to decline! with no end in site. our former CEO spent the day in court. our former BOD resigned our new CFO will not take the job without D and O insurance to cover his AZZ not if but WHEN this company gets sued!!! niether "spin" nor wishful thinking will save this company, without credibal varifiable and completely accurate info BY THE COMPANY we will be at .05 by friday!! thats the way I see it. GLTA!!! we realy need it!!!
MM-
If you actually read the SEC complaint and compare it to the "Order" (Not the minutes but the actual order) you will plainly see that the judge must have gotten some sort of information regarding the assets to justify him not excercising all of the requests on the complaint.
Disgorgement, Civil penalties, and permanently prohibiting RPH from acting as an officer or director of any company.
These are some of the things in the complaint that the judge could have easily included in the order- but due to evidence presented by RPH and CSHD it was NOT included.
-------------------- Got CSHD? Its fun Posts: 766 | From: Washington, DC | Registered: Sep 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Uncle Smelly: I think that the final paragraph in the FHAL/CSHD saga will be written this week. I lost 6K on this mess. I really feel for those who bought a ton of shares and had the opportunity to sell for a big profit - and didn't because of Rufus's lies and pumping. Or those who bought over $2.
RPH and Ben should do time for the mayhem they have caused.
I would love for this to be done this week even if it means a padlock on the office door! at least we would KNOW where we stand! unfortunately I think this saga will continue well into 2007 with the stock trading on grey sheets in the 00 to 01 range eventualy. sad to say. I hope i am wrong!!
Posts: 2503 | From: connecticut | Registered: Mar 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
One bond was an amazing claim, but Rufus has been bold enough to claim up to 15 billion in bonds, talk about over kill. I can't imagine why he would need so much, he has'nt funded zilch up to now. And this seems like an issue that could be told to us shareholders. When I think about it I realize they don't tell me much.
Posts: 957 | Registered: Jun 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
"Disgorgement, Civil penalties, and permanently prohibiting RPH from acting as an officer or director of any company."------------------------------------------ as far as i can tell this case is not over yet and all of these things may yet come to pass.
Posts: 2503 | From: connecticut | Registered: Mar 2005
| IP: Logged |
What I meant in the judge shutting down the company in the end of October was this:
The SEC filed a complaint to shut the doors on CSHD and have them banned from future jobs as officers in any corp. The judge did not rule in favor of what the SEC was going for in the original complaint-
You can compare the complaint with the order to see what the SEC did not get as originally intended.
The shareholder committee can act in that regard if it has certain filings and operational status you think?
RPH designating the chairmen via a PR and then somehow other majority shareholders are moved into position unbeknownst to the other shareholders verifying anyones holdings in this company does not seem to be the valid approach.
So if it was the majority shareholders and not the "committee" then perhaps it was Mike A? Whos the BOD? Who is the Maj shareholders? If they can change CEO's they should be publicly known to the other shareholders?
"The SEC filed a complaint to shut the doors ...."
Nope. That requires an SEC administrative hearing (cf: CMKX); the point is, this is confusing enough without peeps' adding to it.
I have no idea what you "meant," but, yes, the court granted the SEC's motion not only for TRO but also for expedited discovery.
"So if it was the majority shareholders and not the "committee" then perhaps it was Mike A? Whos the BOD? Who is the Maj shareholders? If they can change CEO's they should be publicly known to the other shareholders?"
quote:Originally posted by madmoney: "Disgorgement, Civil penalties, and permanently prohibiting RPH from acting as an officer or director of any company."------------------------------------------ as far as i can tell this case is not over yet and all of these things may yet come to pass.
you are correct it is not over. The point I was making was that the judge must have looked at something that made him NOT slam the doors on this company as well as slam the cuffs on RPH and Co. Perhaps some magic in the sealed exhibit?
This would have never went back onto the market if such a blatent fraud was going on (Yes trading on greys counts for something....not a lot but its more than being shut down).
-------------------- Got CSHD? Its fun Posts: 766 | From: Washington, DC | Registered: Sep 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by madmoney: "Disgorgement, Civil penalties, and permanently prohibiting RPH from acting as an officer or director of any company."------------------------------------------ as far as i can tell this case is not over yet and all of these things may yet come to pass.
you are correct it is not over. The point I was making was that the judge must have looked at something that made him NOT slam the doors on this company as well as slam the cuffs on RPH and Co. Perhaps some magic in the sealed exhibit?
This would have never went back onto the market if such a blatent fraud was going on (Yes trading on greys counts for something....not a lot but its more than being shut down).
Frank, you're still missing the point: the court has NEVER been in a position to "slam the doors."
Due process: SEC suspended for 10 days--they can do that, but they can't suspend again for *the same reasons.*
Subsequently, the civil process began... To say, "This would have never went back onto the market if such a blatent fraud was going on ...." simply ignores the reality of due process.
posted
WOW - Has anybody seen this post from JesusPower yesterday on HSM- Interesting.....First, Anthony changed his tune on SPR about Rufus, now JesusPower1, these are people who were in teleconference right? I think it speaks volumes....
JesusPower1 says:
I owe many of you an apology! I'm sincerely sorry if I have made myself out to be a complete moron for acting so blindly in my passion for the company. I know now that you can't trust just anyone! Proper discernment is vital and major emotions should not cloud your thinking.
I have learned so much from so many of you and applaud you for maintaining level-headed wisdom throughout this whole journey. Some of you are so stinking smart...and intuitive that it blows me away. Keep up the good work!
To answer the quote above...
I understand your thinking...it was mine as well until I sought and received help.
The responsibility of the Primary MM signed on is to protect the stock from crooked MM's and the MM that might be chosen should be a highly respected one in the industry that other MM's will not buck and try to bring the price down. This P MM will maintain the support.
Remember that those short positions prior to 10/16 now have 7x's as many and will now have to cover those within..I'm guessing 3 days..of the resumption of trading on the OTCBB.
After the other MM's file their own form, then we will see where we go from there. I don't know the answer to that yet.
And I hope great good comes out of the congressional hearing on Tuesday.
The true long on the other side of the shorting trade as CONCARNE alluded to...is interesting to say the least. Why did RPH say on SPR the other night that if we got 6 shares and a pps of $1.80 that we should take it? What happened to his conviction of the $11 BV? Why would he seem content to let the company fall apart and be completely de-listed...not hiring an attorney or dealing with the SEC professionally!?! I see ulterior motives!
All truth will come out in time I'm sure. All I can say is that I truly thank God for John, James, Mark and several others that had the integrity to take the necessary action and protect the company and it's AMAZING shareholders.
Continue to hang in there as the execs work through the items necessary to get us moving in the right direction. The business plan is a great one, hence the reason why it attracted so many shareholders of high calibur.
I can't give any timelines b/c I really refuse to play that game anymore. I am long and strong.
Peace
-------------------- ..just remember....Family is EVERYTHING!! Posts: 3944 | From: Rochester, NY | Registered: Sep 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by 6digits: One bond was an amazing claim, but Rufus has been bold enough to claim up to 15 billion in bonds, talk about over kill. I can't imagine why he would need so much, he has'nt funded zilch up to now. And this seems like an issue that could be told to us shareholders. When I think about it I realize they don't tell me much.
As crazy as this may sound, that is exactly why I believe/d the bonds are real in some form or fashion and that we have some kind of ownership or access to them. One bond was amazing...so why claim so much more?...if all is false, it likely would not have radared the SEC IMHO to have only one. The proverbial piece of the puzzle is still missing....
-------------------- Study before you buy, Sell before you think about it.... Posts: 3903 | From: Gulf Coast | Registered: Jun 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
I just wonder. Are we ever going to see the S-4 and S-3? Does anyone know what the timeline on submitting those documents are? How long the company actually has to submit them before something becomes invalidated? Just a quick question. TIA!
-------------------- Muad'Dib knew that every experience carries its lesson. Posts: 216 | From: The Number Six | Registered: Jul 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Jenna: WOW - Has anybody seen this post from JesusPower yesterday on HSM- Interesting.....First, Anthony changed his tune on SPR about Rufus, now JesusPower1, these are people who were in teleconference right? I think it speaks volumes....
JesusPower1 says:
I owe many of you an apology! I'm sincerely sorry if I have made myself out to be a complete moron for acting so blindly in my passion for the company. I know now that you can't trust just anyone! Proper discernment is vital and major emotions should not cloud your thinking.
I have learned so much from so many of you and applaud you for maintaining level-headed wisdom throughout this whole journey. Some of you are so stinking smart...and intuitive that it blows me away. Keep up the good work!
To answer the quote above...
I understand your thinking...it was mine as well until I sought and received help.
The responsibility of the Primary MM signed on is to protect the stock from crooked MM's and the MM that might be chosen should be a highly respected one in the industry that other MM's will not buck and try to bring the price down. This P MM will maintain the support.
Remember that those short positions prior to 10/16 now have 7x's as many and will now have to cover those within..I'm guessing 3 days..of the resumption of trading on the OTCBB.
After the other MM's file their own form, then we will see where we go from there. I don't know the answer to that yet.
And I hope great good comes out of the congressional hearing on Tuesday.
The true long on the other side of the shorting trade as CONCARNE alluded to...is interesting to say the least. Why did RPH say on SPR the other night that if we got 6 shares and a pps of $1.80 that we should take it? What happened to his conviction of the $11 BV? Why would he seem content to let the company fall apart and be completely de-listed...not hiring an attorney or dealing with the SEC professionally!?! I see ulterior motives!
All truth will come out in time I'm sure. All I can say is that I truly thank God for John, James, Mark and several others that had the integrity to take the necessary action and protect the company and it's AMAZING shareholders.
Continue to hang in there as the execs work through the items necessary to get us moving in the right direction. The business plan is a great one, hence the reason why it attracted so many shareholders of high calibur.
I can't give any timelines b/c I really refuse to play that game anymore. I am long and strong.
Peace
That is definately interesting....and quite a change if I recall previous posts. This part truly sticks out:
"I know now that you can't trust just anyone! "
Sad thing is - we really don't know who to trust here.... I mean, I have people that I have talked with, PMd, and have helped me and I believe told me the truth, and I have done likewise... BUT, there are ALWAYS people with ulterior motives....
-------------------- Study before you buy, Sell before you think about it.... Posts: 3903 | From: Gulf Coast | Registered: Jun 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by madmoney: "Disgorgement, Civil penalties, and permanently prohibiting RPH from acting as an officer or director of any company."------------------------------------------ as far as i can tell this case is not over yet and all of these things may yet come to pass.
you are correct it is not over. The point I was making was that the judge must have looked at something that made him NOT slam the doors on this company as well as slam the cuffs on RPH and Co. Perhaps some magic in the sealed exhibit?
This would have never went back onto the market if such a blatent fraud was going on (Yes trading on greys counts for something....not a lot but its more than being shut down).
Frank, you're still missing the point: the court has NEVER been in a position to "slam the doors."
Due process: SEC suspended for 10 days--they can do that, but they can't suspend again for *the same reasons.*
Subsequently, the civil process began... To say, "This would have never went back onto the market if such a blatent fraud was going on ...." simply ignores the reality of due process.
I was under the impression that before rolling out the TRO for epedited discovery that the judge looked at the complaint and some exhibits from CSHD? One piece was sealed-
The judge examined the exhibits and issued the TRO after that....is that not the case? Isn't that where the court would read the complaint from the SEC and examine evidence to determine if the man is a menance to society?
How would that be acting in benefit of the shareholders if they didn't verify some sort of legitimacy of the company prior to it coming back on the market?
The TRO was entered after the judge looked at the case right?
I am no legal expert- so take what I am talking about as speculation.
-------------------- Got CSHD? Its fun Posts: 766 | From: Washington, DC | Registered: Sep 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by MTPromises: There's still one thing I'm not following in regards to the theory that Rufus had friends that were selling into the rise in PPS. While that's a possibility, doesn't the material information in the PRs and SEC filings still need to be accurate for Rufus not to end up in jail? If we find out the bonds claims are false (and perhaps along with other things stated), and Rufus goes to jail, am I really supposed to believe he did it for his friends/family? Or am I erring in my thinking on this?
lol, what's the question, exactly?
Surely you're aware the pennies are chock-full of risky plays and a variety of scams, yes? If not, start here:
quote:Originally posted by madmoney: "Disgorgement, Civil penalties, and permanently prohibiting RPH from acting as an officer or director of any company."------------------------------------------ as far as i can tell this case is not over yet and all of these things may yet come to pass.
you are correct it is not over. The point I was making was that the judge must have looked at something that made him NOT slam the doors on this company as well as slam the cuffs on RPH and Co. Perhaps some magic in the sealed exhibit?
This would have never went back onto the market if such a blatent fraud was going on (Yes trading on greys counts for something....not a lot but its more than being shut down).
Frank, you're still missing the point: the court has NEVER been in a position to "slam the doors."
Due process: SEC suspended for 10 days--they can do that, but they can't suspend again for *the same reasons.*
Subsequently, the civil process began... To say, "This would have never went back onto the market if such a blatent fraud was going on ...." simply ignores the reality of due process.
Thanks TEX i was going to post pretty mutch the same thing, and i DO think when all is done RPH will be barred from holding a position as an officer or director in any publicly traded company for life. ( witch may be why he is so bold - nothing to lose! ) if the company were to restate assets and income in a fully audited financial statement they might get off the greys but of course the stock would be finnished. at this point our new CEO can blame RPH and his team for any and everything and he just may.
Posts: 2503 | From: connecticut | Registered: Mar 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by madmoney: "Disgorgement, Civil penalties, and permanently prohibiting RPH from acting as an officer or director of any company."------------------------------------------ as far as i can tell this case is not over yet and all of these things may yet come to pass.
you are correct it is not over. The point I was making was that the judge must have looked at something that made him NOT slam the doors on this company as well as slam the cuffs on RPH and Co. Perhaps some magic in the sealed exhibit?
This would have never went back onto the market if such a blatent fraud was going on (Yes trading on greys counts for something....not a lot but its more than being shut down).
Frank, you're still missing the point: the court has NEVER been in a position to "slam the doors."
Due process: SEC suspended for 10 days--they can do that, but they can't suspend again for *the same reasons.*
Subsequently, the civil process began... To say, "This would have never went back onto the market if such a blatent fraud was going on ...." simply ignores the reality of due process.
I was under the impression that before rolling out the TRO for epedited discovery that the judge looked at the complaint and some exhibits from CSHD? One piece was sealed-
The judge examined the exhibits and issued the TRO after that....is that not the case? Isn't that where the court would read the complaint from the SEC and examine evidence to determine if the man is a menance to society?
How would that be acting in benefit of the shareholders if they didn't verify some sort of legitimacy of the company prior to it coming back on the market?
The TRO was entered after the judge looked at the case right?
I am no legal expert- so take what I am talking about as speculation.
Frank, basically the SEC has serious questions and asked the court to make the defendant(s) hush up with the claims. Court agrees, to the point of telling the company to respond to discovery requests within a few days (3, as I recall)...
This process does not favor shareholders *already in* -- that's a different route. This process is about prospective/future shareholders.
Believe me--I know the *sting* from awareness of that recognition: eg, I had one in which Gainskeeper showed me up $30k on a $50 buy...but Scottie didn't deliver my shares in time to beat the SEC suspension.
quote:Originally posted by madmoney: "Disgorgement, Civil penalties, and permanently prohibiting RPH from acting as an officer or director of any company."------------------------------------------ as far as i can tell this case is not over yet and all of these things may yet come to pass.
you are correct it is not over. The point I was making was that the judge must have looked at something that made him NOT slam the doors on this company as well as slam the cuffs on RPH and Co. Perhaps some magic in the sealed exhibit?
This would have never went back onto the market if such a blatent fraud was going on (Yes trading on greys counts for something....not a lot but its more than being shut down).
Frank, you're still missing the point: the court has NEVER been in a position to "slam the doors."
Due process: SEC suspended for 10 days--they can do that, but they can't suspend again for *the same reasons.*
Subsequently, the civil process began... To say, "This would have never went back onto the market if such a blatent fraud was going on ...." simply ignores the reality of due process.
Tex, Not arguing (just curious), but my question would be then what is the point of suspending for 10 days if due process has to take place anyway? In other words, what is the suspension of 10 days allowing time for? Why not just let the stock continue to trade in lieu of suspending?
Posts: 603 | From: Plymouth, MN | Registered: Jun 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
If the judge has no position to shut the doors down on RPH and the company then I don't get what they filed the exhibits for?
One was sealed and apparently been dubbed the ace in the hole for CSHD.
I would think that if the SEC presents the court with a potential fraud case and the defendent has NO proof to the claims then the court would step in and stop the company from going back on the market and further defrauding the public.
Back in a bit- off to dinner
-fw
-------------------- Got CSHD? Its fun Posts: 766 | From: Washington, DC | Registered: Sep 2006
| IP: Logged |
"if the company were to restate assets and income in a fully audited financial statement they might get off the greys but of course the stock would be finnished."
Were that to happen, the market would determine, based on new info... extravagant claims prolly would not be wise, though...
"if the company were to restate assets and income in a fully audited financial statement they might get off the greys but of course the stock would be finnished."
Were that to happen, the market would determine, based on new info... extravagant claims prolly would not be wise, though...
quite true! TEX: the market will determine the companies value (stock price) based on stated and proven assets and percieved potential future value. as well as the credibility of management in it`s ability to execute the companies buisness plan.
Posts: 2503 | From: connecticut | Registered: Mar 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by madmoney: "Disgorgement, Civil penalties, and permanently prohibiting RPH from acting as an officer or director of any company."------------------------------------------ as far as i can tell this case is not over yet and all of these things may yet come to pass.
you are correct it is not over. The point I was making was that the judge must have looked at something that made him NOT slam the doors on this company as well as slam the cuffs on RPH and Co. Perhaps some magic in the sealed exhibit?
This would have never went back onto the market if such a blatent fraud was going on (Yes trading on greys counts for something....not a lot but its more than being shut down).
Frank, you're still missing the point: the court has NEVER been in a position to "slam the doors."
Due process: SEC suspended for 10 days--they can do that, but they can't suspend again for *the same reasons.*
Subsequently, the civil process began... To say, "This would have never went back onto the market if such a blatent fraud was going on ...." simply ignores the reality of due process.
Tex, Not arguing (just curious), but my question would be then what is the point of suspending for 10 days if due process has to take place anyway? In other words, what is the suspension of 10 days allowing time for? Why not just let the stock continue to trade in lieu of suspending?
Suspension says the SEC has serious questions, not only for traders to consider but also (and maybe even more crucial) for broker/dealers. Individuals are their own "fiduciary" agents, but broker/dealers can get on the hook in such a way as to affect "the system." It allows time for allocating resources to "dig in" as well as for companies to say, "wait, wait--what do we need to show you?" or to perhaps wrangle enough evidence to convince a broker/dealer to take on the resposibility of filing a 15c2-11.
At the point the suspension is issued, the SEC is convinced that allowing the company to trade unfettered is too big a risk to continue "biz as usual."
[added after posting]:
Also, that's why I emphasize precise language regarding "halts" v "suspensions"; a halt can in fact be beneficial, allowing market to adjust to new info, then ... "Play ball!" But a suspension is always severe.
quote:Originally posted by frank021474: If the judge has no position to shut the doors down on RPH and the company then I don't get what they filed the exhibits for?
One was sealed and apparently been dubbed the ace in the hole for CSHD.
I would think that if the SEC presents the court with a potential fraud case and the defendent has NO proof to the claims then the court would step in and stop the company from going back on the market and further defrauding the public.
Back in a bit- off to dinner
-fw
it is not easy to shut down a company no matter how massive the fraud! did you know that ENRON still trades!
Posts: 2503 | From: connecticut | Registered: Mar 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by frank021474: If the judge has no position to shut the doors down on RPH and the company then I don't get what they filed the exhibits for?
One was sealed and apparently been dubbed the ace in the hole for CSHD.
I would think that if the SEC presents the court with a potential fraud case and the defendent has NO proof to the claims then the court would step in and stop the company from going back on the market and further defrauding the public.
Back in a bit- off to dinner
-fw
lol...due process.
Magna Carta ---> Constitution ---> due process
The company has an avenue to defend itself, ie, the "king" can't order his "soldiers" to "go get" whomever.
Pure speculation: I've seen an interesting post at I-hub indicating the sealed exhibit was personal bank/brokerage records...makes sense to me (privacy, etc), but I have *no* way of knowing or supporting/refuting...
"I would think ...."
Well, what you think is different from the process; broker/dealers are aware SEC has questions, as well as traders. The "shut down" may well happen, but it's a long process.
posted
imho, the failure to answer the motion for default says it all. they should have had an attorney at the court house door when the courthouse opened this morning and then pr'ed it. today's drop is a lack of confidence that the company answered the motion. think about it. if you're right, show up, prove up, then shout it from the rooftops. if guilty, be quiet and slink dack into the shadows.
-------------------- I'm from Missouri - Show Me! Posts: 950 | From: Middle of Nowhere, Missouri | Registered: May 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by 66inxs: imho, the failure to answer the motion for default says it all. they should have had an attorney at the court house door when the courthouse opened this morning and then pr'ed it. today's drop is a lack of confidence that the company answered the motion. think about it. if you're right, show up, prove up, then shout it from the rooftops. if guilty, be quiet and slink dack into the shadows.
How long, re preceding events, did it take for docs for to show up? Am wondering whether it's still possible the company answered today...
posted
hopefuly, they did. i should be in a place where there is pacer access tomorrow. will post as soon as i find out either way. but they should have issued a pr about the answer, don't you think? of course, that could show up at 10:00 tonight too.
-------------------- I'm from Missouri - Show Me! Posts: 950 | From: Middle of Nowhere, Missouri | Registered: May 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
nah, id only feel scammed if all that happened and the ceo still told the public to buy the chit outta it.
oh.
~BB
quote:Originally posted by 3403: Would I feel scammed if I were promised a reset value of $15.00 and it never happened? Would I feel scammed if there were a secretive share holders committee? Would I feel scammed if the CEO's changed every couple weeks? Would I feel scammed if the BOD's were all fired? Would I feel scammed if the founder appeared drunk on SPR, and didn't make sense? Would I feel scammed if my purchase at $2.00 fell to pennies in a week? Would I feel scammed in our Billions in assets either weren't there or untouchable? Hmmmmmmmm wonder what it would take to feel scammed?
Topic Closed
UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!
Printer-friendly view of this topic
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
