quote:Originally posted by Ironman64: Please keep in mind, I am not saying that the class action target was Harris. And yes, MrCat, I know about your conversation with him.
The purpose of your suit was to be to get things rolling with a legal action. To request trading records, etc....
Does your response change any now?
No, my response doesnt change at all. I made no attempt whatsoever to make a move on CSHD in a legal sense.
"The purpose of your suit"
You still write as if I have / had a suit planned or in progress. My interest in seeing the trading records pulled is no different than anyone elses but there was never a discussion of a lawsuit other than the phone conversation with Mr Harris where the question actually came up "Who would the suit be against if there were to be one?".
If you really know about the discussion I had with Mr Harris im surprised you arent already aware of these facts. On that same note, I might ask Mr Harris why you know about my conversation with him and chose to discuss it on the board. You say you protect your sources but spilled your guts against the Boss himself.
IP: Logged |
posted
Ironman, can you answer the simple question of "Will people who have seen their investments in this go from $20,000 to worthless ever see their initial cash outlay again". I don't think many people here are concerned with who gets what punishment as much as they are interested if they will ever see those $$$ again.
IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by new2stocks: "You say you protect your sources but spilled your guts against the Boss himself."
What is Rufus the boss of anyway? He was supposed to be working for the shareholders, we the shareholders do not work for him!!!!
You know what I mean....the point is Ironman "knows of" a private call between Mr Harris and myself. Im curious how.
Yep that would be interesting to know. I would also like to know why he feels it necessary to hide who he is. At this point, everyone knows who everyone is.....why this big secret I'm in the know boat stuff again?
IP: Logged |
posted
Wow so many old faces from CSHD. I remember all you guys from last year. Hope it all works out for you all and this battle with Rufus. You all deserve to get some kinda money out of this. I don't post much or trade much anymore but still hold the good advice Chartwalker gave me last year when this thing was flying high. Good luck guys
-------------------- Best Regards and Good Trading
IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by PCola77: Ironman, can you answer the simple question of "Will people who have seen their investments in this go from $20,000 to worthless ever see their initial cash outlay again". I don't think many people here are concerned with who gets what punishment as much as they are interested if they will ever see those $$$ again.
I whole-heartedly believe that we will see our money (and then some) as well as CSHD becoming fully reporting again.
Things aren't as they seem....with CSHD and with certain individuals.
IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by PCola77: Ironman, can you answer the simple question of "Will people who have seen their investments in this go from $20,000 to worthless ever see their initial cash outlay again". I don't think many people here are concerned with who gets what punishment as much as they are interested if they will ever see those $$$ again.
I whole-heartedly believe that we will see our money (and then some) as well as CSHD becoming fully reporting again.
Things aren't as they seem....with CSHD and with certain individuals.
If this trades again for over 1 buck I will sell all and give the money to a family in need.
Who knows how much this lesson saved me in the long haul.
IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by PCola77: Ironman, can you answer the simple question of "Will people who have seen their investments in this go from $20,000 to worthless ever see their initial cash outlay again". I don't think many people here are concerned with who gets what punishment as much as they are interested if they will ever see those $$$ again.
I whole-heartedly believe that we will see our money (and then some) as well as CSHD becoming fully reporting again.
Things aren't as they seem....with CSHD and with certain individuals.
If this trades again for over 1 buck I will sell all and give the money to a family in need.
Who knows how much this lesson saved me in the long haul.
yup, that's the "silver lining" on these kinds of plays...
At the risk of boring long-time readers who have heard this before, that's why I follow the GVRPs and CSHDs of the world: I hit GVRP about a month or two into trading, and -- boy, howdy -- did I ever get a ride on the roller-coaster learning curve.
Still say the best thing I ever did as a newbie was not my early "wins" but the "foolish decision" to plop down 50 or 100 bucks on GVRP. That way, I was "invested" enough to have a possible return of somewhere between $15k and $30k.
With that much possible return (which a few Ameritraders realized), man-o-man, I was GLUED to the screen for days!
Perhaps needless to say, I got a quick lesson in DD, the parameters of PRs vs the SEC's powers, and the recognition that you can--even as an adult--talk yourself into going along with hype.
So, ya...as far as I can figure?
We all pay our dues, one way or another.
-------------------- Nashoba Holba Chepulechi Adventures in microcapitalism...
IP: Logged |
posted
Thank you for the honest answer. Would you be willing to further break it out to say whether you believe even those who have since sold will get their money, or just those still holding? And what about people like myself, who bought some on the greys near the current price, would I also be able to sell in the $1+ range, or are you saying this would be more like a disgorgement from those who made money to those who lost??
quote:Originally posted by Ironman64:
quote:Originally posted by PCola77: Ironman, can you answer the simple question of "Will people who have seen their investments in this go from $20,000 to worthless ever see their initial cash outlay again". I don't think many people here are concerned with who gets what punishment as much as they are interested if they will ever see those $$$ again.
I whole-heartedly believe that we will see our money (and then some) as well as CSHD becoming fully reporting again.
Things aren't as they seem....with CSHD and with certain individuals.
In short, I believe all shareholders, whether holding pre-10/16 or grey shares will benefit when this ride is over.
Now the tricky part....I am not sure what happens to those that have sold pre-10/16 shares. As I recall from discussions with Harris, a shareholder of record at the close on October 16, 2006 is subject to the 6:1 TPR, thus in its purest form even those that have sold after pre-10/16 after 10/16/06 should still have shares at some point in the future. Those shares will hold value as any other share.
Now, one other item. I have never asked this question of anyone that would "know", but I personally feel that a grey share or a pre-10/16 can not be of a separate class, meaning they can't be priced differently. The only difference being the obvious 6:1 award due to a pre-10/16 owner.
IP: Logged |
posted
Finally, you and I agree about something. Was curious if you would claim that they would/could be treated differently as I seem to remember Rufus saying in the past.
quote:Originally posted by Ironman64: but I personally feel that a grey share or a pre-10/16 can not be of a separate class, meaning they can't be priced differently.
In short, I believe all shareholders, whether holding pre-10/16 or grey shares will benefit when this ride is over.
Now the tricky part....I am not sure what happens to those that have sold pre-10/16 shares. As I recall from discussions with Harris, a shareholder of record at the close on October 16, 2006 is subject to the 6:1 TPR, thus in its purest form even those that have sold after pre-10/16 after 10/16/06 should still have shares at some point in the future. Those shares will hold value as any other share.
Now, one other item. I have never asked this question of anyone that would "know", but I personally feel that a grey share or a pre-10/16 can not be of a separate class, meaning they can't be priced differently. The only difference being the obvious 6:1 award due to a pre-10/16 owner.
Really, now that's interesting. How would one entail to award shares based on pre 10/16 vs post 10/16? It would be a nightmare and the fact that an Ex date was never determined to award those shares would also present a legal nightmare. But since we are suspending disbelieve here please tells us the logistics of how this could ever be accomplished.
IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by PCola77: Finally, you and I agree about something. Was curious if you would claim that they would/could be treated differently as I seem to remember Rufus saying in the past.
quote:Originally posted by Ironman64: but I personally feel that a grey share or a pre-10/16 can not be of a separate class, meaning they can't be priced differently.
not quite following...
"greys" "pre-10/16s"
etc...
CSHD's entry onto the grey's is fact; the "6:1" divvy is as much a wisp in the wind as PHGI's "Canadian divvy."
-------------------- Nashoba Holba Chepulechi Adventures in microcapitalism...
IP: Logged |
posted
not a divvy Tex....of course the "other side" wants to call it just that in a futile attempt to foil it cuz of no "ex-div date".
I believe if you examine the PR on 10/16 you will NOT find the word "dividend" but rather TPR.
And as we all know now, the TPR was the event that sent the crooks scrambling to the Atlanta SEC to pull out all stops. And now we wait to see what the ultimate verdict is once things play out.
IP: Logged |
posted
Wally and Tex, I hate to go to the dark side on this one, but I was in fact involved in a stock that succeeded in retoractively granting a dividend to holders as of a certain date, even if they had sold the stock after the retroactive date. I believe it was one of the incarnations of AWYB/AWBV/HVLN.
IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Ironman64: not a divvy Tex....of course the "other side" wants to call it just that in a futile attempt to foil it cuz of no "ex-div date".
I believe if you examine the PR on 10/16 you will NOT find the word "dividend" but rather TPR.
And as we all know now, the TPR was the event that sent the crooks scrambling to the Atlanta SEC to pull out all stops. And now we wait to see what the ultimate verdict is once things play out.
well, yeah, it *is*...and too many here have now seen that when whatever company it is under discussion "awards" cash or stock, it's still treated the same.
In other words, we (most of us here) do NOT go by PRs but by filings...too many of us have seen even filings with the SEC turn out to be hinky--so we prefer the Daily List on OTCBB, which is the the official site for publication of data from the NASDAQ department I mentioned.
For that 6:1 you mention to take effect? It would have to be filed--there's no "backdating" on such "awards."
The Threshold Price Reset(TPR) has nothing to do with this play--other than the pump--as it *never* qualified. How about this?
Instead of acting out on the "Mr. Mysterious" impulse? Please post the regs under which this qualified for a TPR...
-------------------- Nashoba Holba Chepulechi Adventures in microcapitalism...
IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by PCola77: Wally and Tex, I hate to go to the dark side on this one, but I was in fact involved in a stock that succeeded in retoractively granting a dividend to holders as of a certain date, even if they had sold the stock after the retroactive date. I believe it was one of the incarnations of AWYB/AWBV/HVLN.
Jeez, I've never said *everything* follows the rules...
look at Katie Gold...
or GVRP (again)...
But, dadgum--
1) is that something we wanna support? as in legal...
2) is that something we can count on, as traders?
I would prefer consistency, eh?
lol..."dark side"
you're simply posting what you know, I trust.
That's different than trying to "sway" opinion--we always discuss facts as we know them. Sometimes, we don't figure chit out for months on end...
case in point
-------------------- Nashoba Holba Chepulechi Adventures in microcapitalism...
IP: Logged |
posted
Well, just saying there *is* precedent. And as with the rest of you, I'll believe it to happen a second time not a moment before I see it happen again... For some odd reason, I don't trust Rufie to come through on this one either. Maybe his 0-100 in predictions has biased me though
quote:Originally posted by T e x:
quote:Originally posted by PCola77: Wally and Tex, I hate to go to the dark side on this one, but I was in fact involved in a stock that succeeded in retoractively granting a dividend to holders as of a certain date, even if they had sold the stock after the retroactive date. I believe it was one of the incarnations of AWYB/AWBV/HVLN.
Jeez, I've never said *everything* follows the rules...
look at Katie Gold...
or GVRP (again)...
But, dadgum--
1) is that something we wanna support? as in legal...
2) is that something we can count on, as traders?
I would prefer consistency, eh?
lol..."dark side"
you're simply posting what you know, I trust.
That's different than trying to "sway" opinion--we always discuss facts as we know them. Sometimes, we don't figure chit out for months on end...
posted
There is no precedent for a TPR, since it has do with issues that are other than common stock. This isn't to say that it couldn't happen but at this time there is no precedent for it.
As, Tex, Says how are we as retail traders to understand the ground rules if they consistently change.
I would rather trade under rules that are constant, at least then I know the rules, than trade under constantly changing rules that benefit people other than the retail traders that stand to lose the most.
Why do I say that retail traders stand to lose the most? Because the changes always seem to benefit anyone other than the retail trader.
IP: Logged |
The crooks, including the SEC, were fine with what CSHD was doing as long as the 6:1 was called a dividend. The moment it was pr'd and 8k'd as a TPR, all hell broke loose.
We wouldn't be where we are now otherwise. Once the events going on behind the scenes right now play out, it will all be obvious.
IP: Logged |
I'm sure the SEC *did* have problems with the 6-for-1: no matter how you count the tail, a dog's still got only four legs. Although, as I recall, that wasn't mentioned in either the suspension notice or the complaint. I *suspect* they were holding it in reserve in case they decided a second suspension were necesssary...but that's pure speculation.
Anyway, as previously requested, why don't you simply post the pertinent regs that allow such a "TPR" ?
-------------------- Nashoba Holba Chepulechi Adventures in microcapitalism...
IP: Logged |
posted
I know what TPR stands for, but what is the difference between the two? According to Ironman the reason all hell broke loose was because it was pr'd & 8k'd as a TPR, not a dividend.
IP: Logged |
UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!
Printer-friendly view of this topic
![[Roll Eyes]](rolleyes.gif)
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
