Allstocks.com's Bulletin Board
Topic Closed  Topic Closed
Post New Topic  New Poll  
Topic Closed  Topic Closed
my profile login | register | search | faq | forum home

  next oldest topic   next newest topic
» Allstocks.com's Bulletin Board » Micro Penny Stocks, Penny Stocks $0.10 & Under » CMKX IV New Thread....GOT IT - HOLDIN' IT (Page 36)

 - UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!   This topic comprises 65 pages: 1  2  3  ...  33  34  35  36  37  38  39  ...  63  64  65   
Author Topic: CMKX IV New Thread....GOT IT - HOLDIN' IT
HarryHar
Member


Rate Member
Icon 1 posted      Profile for HarryHar     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
I am happy to see the name Roger D Glenn once again. For the bashers that said he was gone already...nice try...

Now for some analysis...

ASSUMING that our land is as valuable as their land...

60% of 500,000 acres = 300,000 acres for 75 billion shares.

5% of 1,400,000 acres = 70,000 acres for (7.5 million shares from dividend as of aug 20 at $5.20 per share, which is today's closing price) $39,000,000

300,000acres divided by 70,000acres = 4.286

$39,000,000 the price of 5% of our land multiply by 4.286 = $167,154,000

$167,154,000 divided by 75,000,000,000 shares = .0022287 value per share

This is pure speculation, and assuming our land is like their land.


Posts: 212 | Registered: Jan 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Highwaychild
Member


Icon 1 posted      Profile for Highwaychild     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
HA HA HA

Posts: 2634 | From: The highway | Registered: Feb 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
bill1352
Member


Member Rated:
4
Icon 1 posted      Profile for bill1352     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
uc is looking to get .00155 per share for the 40 billion shares...hmmmm
Posts: 3651 | From: Algonac, MI. 48001 | Registered: Jun 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Wallace#1
Member


Member Rated:
4
Icon 1 posted      Profile for Wallace#1         Edit/Delete Post 
Will talk to all you nice, kind, thoughtful, down-to-earth and wonderful folks later. Must go to dinner.
Posts: 3607 | From: NJ - Outside Phila. | Registered: Mar 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
HarryHar
Member


Rate Member
Icon 1 posted      Profile for HarryHar     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
They didn't say anything about authorizing another 35 billion shares, just issuing. So we KNOW that all the authorized are not issued. That's GREAT news!
Posts: 212 | Registered: Jan 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
roger7485
Member


Rate Member
Icon 1 posted      Profile for roger7485     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
Congratulations, you just convinced yourself that 35 billion shares issued was a positive.
Posts: 609 | From: Bloomington, Indiana | Registered: Feb 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Prdponce
Member


Member Rated:
4
Icon 1 posted      Profile for Prdponce         Edit/Delete Post 
so, we can assume that UC owned at least 51% plus another 40b = 291b of 500 b A/S.

How many more shares does he own? my guess is a lot more, i hope


Posts: 5120 | Registered: Jun 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
bill1352
Member


Member Rated:
4
Icon 1 posted      Profile for bill1352     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
As announced earlier, U.S. Canadian Minerals Inc. recently issued 7.5 million shares of the company's stock to CMKM in exchange for certain mineral rights. Those shares have been issued to CMKM and will be distributed to shareholders of record of CMKM on Aug. 20, 2004. Due to Casavant's share contribution to the property acquisition by CMKM occurring prior to the Aug. 20, 2004, date, Casavant will not receive this or any subsequent dividend.


Does this mean that all UC owned of cmkx was 40 billion shares? He gave up all shares in cmkx for this 60% of 500,000 acres? sure put a chink in the idea he was buying up huge blocks of shares. IMO it also hurts the idea of it being naked shorted because the o/s is probably 400 billion. still i find it hard to believe he only had 10% of all shares.


Posts: 3651 | From: Algonac, MI. 48001 | Registered: Jun 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
slpj1960
Member


Rate Member
Icon 14 posted      Profile for slpj1960     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
With all of these companies dealing with each others interests as stated in all of the latest PR's. What do you all think of the possibility of a "mega" merger happening? It sure does seem like a good possibility to me!
Posts: 20 | Registered: Jun 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Prdponce
Member


Member Rated:
4
Icon 1 posted      Profile for Prdponce         Edit/Delete Post 
There were three (UCAD, CMKX and Nevada Mineral), now there are only two.

CMKX 60% + UCAD 40%

Look more like a merger with every PR's

Coincedence? same headlines

CMKM Diamonds Inc. Acquires Additional Interests in Saskatchewan
Monday July 26, 7:57 pm ET

LAS VEGAS--(BUSINESS WIRE)--July 26, 2004--CMKM Diamonds Inc. (Pink Sheets: CMKX - News) announced today that it has agreed to acquire a 60%, undivided interest in 500,000 acres of potential Kimberlite mineral property in Saskatchewan, Canada. The property is currently owned by Nevada Minerals Inc., a private company unrelated to CMKM. The property is being developed by a joint venture between Nevada Minerals Inc. and U.S. Canadian Minerals Inc. CMKM will acquire the interest in the property in exchange for 75 billion shares of restricted Rule 144 stock of CMKM. In order to reduce the dilution to CMKM's shareholders as a result of this transaction, Urban Casavant, CMKM's CEO, has agreed to contribute 40 billion shares owned by himself in exchange for an agreement from CMKM stating that Casavant will be paid only if the acquired property actually yields a profit. According to the agreement, Casavant will be paid one-half of the net proceeds from any mining on the property, after paying all associated expenses, up to a maximum aggregate total of US$62 million. CMKM will issue 35 billion new shares of the company to Nevada Minerals Inc. to complete the transaction.

U.S. Canadian Minerals Purchases Additional Interests In Saskatchewan
Monday July 19, 7:26 pm ET

LAS VEGAS--(BUSINESS WIRE)--July 19, 2004--U.S. Canadian Minerals Inc. (OTCBB: UCAD - News) announced today that it has purchased an additional 20% interest in claims in Saskatchewan in the Fort a la Corne area. The company had previously acquired a 20% interest from Nevada Minerals Inc. under its Joint Venture Agreement bringing its total ownership interest to 40%. The company will exchange 100,000 shares of the company's Preferred Class A stock, which have conversion and voting rights to common shares.


Posts: 5120 | Registered: Jun 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
WinsumLosesum
Member


Icon 1 posted      Profile for WinsumLosesum     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
quote:
Originally posted by HarryHar:
They didn't say anything about authorizing another 35 billion shares, just issuing. So we KNOW that all the authorized are not issued. That's GREAT news!

"CMKM will issue 35 billion new shares of the company"

What does "new" mean?


Posts: 1872 | From: right here | Registered: Apr 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Highwaychild
Member


Icon 1 posted      Profile for Highwaychild     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
From D. Glenn mans home page.(I guess...there was a picture of him.)

------------------------------------------------------------------


Roger has over 20 years of experience in securities law. He has handled numerous IPOs and other public offerings, PIPE transactions, exchange and hostile and friendly tender offers, mergers and acquisitions involving public and private companies, private placements, Rule 144A sales, Rule 10b5-1 plans and all filings and reports required by the Securities Exchange Act of 1934.


The companies he has represented have been in the telecommunications, media, health care, financial services, technology and software industries and have had securities listed on the New York and American stock exchanges and the NASDAQ stock market.


Notable Experience

Roger was involved in the $600 million acquisition by a major telecom company of corporations and limited liability companies holding FCC licenses.
Roger represented another major telecom company in a cash tender offer and the $450 million outstanding high-yield debt of an acquisition target pursuant to a change-of-control indenture provision.
He was instrumental in the acquisition of an Austrian wireless telecom company with $1 billion of assets.
Roger handled the successful takeover of an insurance company by hostile tender offer.
Roger represented a telecom company in the issuance of $200 million in Senior Notes in a PIPE transaction.

Recent Speaking Engagements and Publications

The Going Public Sourcebook,co-author, a guide to the initial public offering process and ongoing reporting and other compliance obligations of a public company published by RR Donnelley Financial.
Corporate Responsibilities of Public Companies in 2003, author, 2003.

Before Edwards & Angell

After college, Roger practiced as a Certified Public Accountant on the audit staff of Deloitte & Touche in Miami. He began his legal career with the Securities and Exchange Commission, where he conducted investigations for the enforcement division.


Posts: 2634 | From: The highway | Registered: Feb 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
bill1352
Member


Member Rated:
4
Icon 1 posted      Profile for bill1352     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
nevada sold 40% of 100% to ucad...cmkx got 60% of nevada's 60%...my brain is way too tired to try & figure what % of the total that is...but both ucad's & cmkx's pr's brought up the fly-by testing...ucad said they wanted to look at the results a bit more then bought from nevada and the cmkx...must have been something seen in that fly-by...also back in 03 UC said he wanted to bring a bunch of JR mining companies together, with the other 2 in the first 1.4 million acres this now has 5 companies...maybe UC is looking to add the one thing missing from this soap opera....REAL hands on value
Posts: 3651 | From: Algonac, MI. 48001 | Registered: Jun 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Money_Penny
Member


Rate Member
Icon 1 posted      Profile for Money_Penny     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
Prdonce,

I like your math. It adds up.


Posts: 430 | Registered: Jun 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Wallace#1
Member


Member Rated:
4
Icon 1 posted      Profile for Wallace#1         Edit/Delete Post 
Winsum,

Whatever they are calling the shares being issued for the Nevada interests, they still have to be coming from the authorized and unissued shares. Upon issuance they become issued and outstanding. If the authorized at the time of issuance is 500 bil, then it is a reduction from that 500 bil. However, since there is no information publicly available and because UC + family probably control, they certainly could have authorized more shares...even another 500 bil.


Posts: 3607 | From: NJ - Outside Phila. | Registered: Mar 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Highwaychild
Member


Icon 1 posted      Profile for Highwaychild     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
Rule 144
******** http://www.sec.gov/investor/pubs/rule144.htm

[This message has been edited by highwaychild (edited July 26, 2004).]


Posts: 2634 | From: The highway | Registered: Feb 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Money_Penny
Member


Rate Member
Icon 1 posted      Profile for Money_Penny     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
quote:
Originally posted by Wallace#1:
Winsum,

Whatever they are calling the shares being issued for the Nevada interests, they still have to be coming from the authorized and unissued shares. Upon issuance they become issued and outstanding. If the authorized at the time of issuance is 500 bil, then it is a reduction from that 500 bil. However, since there is no information publicly available and because UC + family probably control, they certainly could have authorized more shares...even another 500 bil.


I could have sworn I read somewhere that 500 billion was the max. allowable A/S the state of Nevada would allow. How could they possibly have authorized more shares? Another 500 billion? Are you serious? Please back up this bogus claim with FACTS.


Posts: 430 | Registered: Jun 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
WinsumLosesum
Member


Icon 1 posted      Profile for WinsumLosesum     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
Thanks, Wallace. That was a well-worded explanation. I actually understood it. I'm sure it helped a few others here, too. Authorized ==> Issued ==> Outstanding

I think my confusion stems from not understanding what "authorized shares" are. I picture them as shares locked up in a vault somewhere. The company chooses to release (issue) a certain amount of shares from the vault, which are then the "outstanding shares." Now, if additional shares are released (issued) from the vault, I wouldn't call them "new", since they already existed in the vault.

However, if "authorized shares" is more like a license to print a certain amount of shares, then more shares printed (issued) from that amount could very well be referred to as "new".

"CMKM will issue 35 billion new shares of the company"

Man, I hope that made sense...


Posts: 1872 | From: right here | Registered: Apr 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Wallace#1
Member


Member Rated:
4
Icon 1 posted      Profile for Wallace#1         Edit/Delete Post 
Here's the part of that Nevada Minerals deal I really like:

"In order to reduce the dilution to CMKM's shareholders as a result of this transaction, Urban Casavant, CMKM's CEO, has agreed to contribute 40 billion shares owned by himself...profit."

Please note the "contribute".

"According to the agreement, Casavant will be paid one half of the net proceeds from any mining on the property...up to a maximum aggregate total of US $62 million.

Now that's some contribution on behalf of not diluting shareholders' interests! LMAO
Let's see, 40 billion shares at today's close of .0004 =s $16,000. And all for a tiny potential of $62 million for UC. WOW!!!!! Some contribution...and so as not to dilute shareholders' interests!


Posts: 3607 | From: NJ - Outside Phila. | Registered: Mar 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Wallace#1
Member


Member Rated:
4
Icon 1 posted      Profile for Wallace#1         Edit/Delete Post 
Winsum,

Were you kidding or did I just confuse you all the more? If I confused, I will try to explain again, and hopefully, more clearly.


Posts: 3607 | From: NJ - Outside Phila. | Registered: Mar 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Money_Penny
Member


Rate Member
Icon 1 posted      Profile for Money_Penny     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
According to my calulator, it is $16 million, but that's just my calculator....
Posts: 430 | Registered: Jun 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Brad
Member


Rate Member
Icon 1 posted      Profile for Brad     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
quote:
Originally posted by Wallace#1:

Now that's some contribution on behalf of not diluting shareholders' interests! LMAO
Let's see, 40 billion shares at today's close of .0004 =s $16,000. And all for a tiny potential of $62 million for UC. WOW!!!!! Some contribution...and so as not to dilute shareholders' interests!


You should check your calculator Wallace. Mine says that's a $16 million dollar contribution by UC not $16 thousand. And that's at today's closing .0004 which most longs here believe is a way under-priced bargain. Sounds like an unselfish move by UC by my book.

[This message has been edited by Brad (edited July 26, 2004).]


Posts: 247 | From: Austin, TX | Registered: Jul 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Wallace#1
Member


Member Rated:
4
Icon 1 posted      Profile for Wallace#1         Edit/Delete Post 
I stand corrected.
Posts: 3607 | From: NJ - Outside Phila. | Registered: Mar 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Upside
Member


Icon 1 posted      Profile for Upside     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
originally posted by Money_Penny:
quote:
I could have sworn I read somewhere that 500 billion was the max. allowable A/S the state of Nevada would allow. How could they possibly have authorized more shares?

Money,
I thought I read that somewhere too. I'll try to dig it up and post it if I find it.


Posts: 5729 | From: Wisconsin | Registered: Sep 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
WinsumLosesum
Member


Icon 1 posted      Profile for WinsumLosesum     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
quote:
Originally posted by Wallace#1:
Winsum,

Were you kidding or did I just confuse you all the more? If I confused, I will try to explain again, and hopefully, more clearly.


No, no, no, Wallace. I wasn't kidding. I like how you explained it. The way you said it was just the right way for my brain to conceive it.

My confusion didn't arise because of your explanation, but rather remains in spite of your explanation.

Which of my two descriptions of "authorized shares" is more accurate? I'm just stuck on explaining why they used the adjective, "new", to describe the shares.


Posts: 1872 | From: right here | Registered: Apr 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Brad
Member


Rate Member
Icon 1 posted      Profile for Brad     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
Interesting comments from another board.

---------------------------------------

By: houstontex1110
26 Jul 2004, 09:29 PM EDT
Msg. 52250 of 52335
Jump to msg. #
MATHEMATICAL ANALYSIS I LOVE IT

1. CMKM is acquiring 60% of the undivided min. rts to 500,000 acres. Undivided means our rights extends across every square inch of the property. We therefore net 100% of 300,000 acres.

2. OK, but is it a good buy or did we get hosed? CMKM shareholders are paying out 35billion shares and receiving 50% of the income. Income is what it is all about...bottom line stuff. UC for his 40billion shares receives a maximum amount, so I understand, and then is cut out of the profit distribution. That implies we the shareholders steps into his position and receives his prior profit flow as well.

3. So for 35 billion shares eventually you will receive 100% of the income, therefore we just bought 300,000 acres for 35billion shares times the close of .0005 equals $17,500,000. Debeers values a measly 58,000 acres at 40 to 50 billion dollars. We just purchased nearly 6 times as much for a song and dance-$17,500,000.

4. I apologize if the numbers are off. Ordinarily I would take hours to run these numbers, but posters are screaming for an analysis. Oh, you should add on the I believe $67,000,000 Equals $84,500,000. The $67,000,000 Is Uc's total profit. Folks, we just pulled off a grand deal. We do not actually dillute our stock by a total of $84.5million, we just lose $67million out of perhaps 10 billion. Can you live with that?

5. UC has demonstrated that he is above all...A DEAL MAKER, as Donald Trump wrote, The Art Of The Deal.

6. Not only is it a bargain price, it diversifies our land holdings. You never know where that mega giant mineral discovery will come through. You must have a sizable piece of the action across a broad expanse. UC is attempting to ensure we will find the next company maker.

7. Finally we are paying a little over $60 per acre for 100% of the mineral rights covering a net 300,000 acres.

8. Therefore, do not raise the objection of dillution. Dillution is only relevant when you get burned. We just bought a 100 acre ranch for $6000, figuratively speaking.


Posts: 247 | From: Austin, TX | Registered: Jul 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
kguts11
Member


Rate Member
Icon 1 posted      Profile for kguts11     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
Sorry, too slow.

Kev

[This message has been edited by kguts11 (edited July 26, 2004).]


Posts: 78 | From: beaufort, sc, usa | Registered: Aug 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Wallace#1
Member


Member Rated:
4
Icon 1 posted      Profile for Wallace#1         Edit/Delete Post 
Up,

I am not an expert on Nevada Corporate law so I could have been incorrect as to an additional 500 bil. Don't bother yourself if you do not feel like it. Excluding something like that (state of inc. law) UC + other controlling shareholders can do almost anything they wish to do with the company and it's shares.


Posts: 3607 | From: NJ - Outside Phila. | Registered: Mar 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
VNGNTN1
Member


Rate Member
Icon 1 posted      Profile for VNGNTN1     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
The 40bn shares UC is using are part of the ones he restricted last year. The 35bn are in the treasury.
SO
We are beginning to get a piecmeal inventory.
Can anyone remember how many shares UC restricted?
1-UC restricted shares=40bn+??
2-35bn in treasury
3-??bn retired(35bn may be part of this number)
VAN

Posts: 1424 | From: Peoria, IL. USA | Registered: Oct 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
rivercity
Member


Rate Member
Icon 1 posted      Profile for rivercity     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
wallace, you left some items out,UC gets paid only if property is profitable and after expenses. so not only do they have to mine this property, it has to be profitable after expenses....all the facts please... rivercity
Posts: 58 | From: austin,tx. u.s.a. | Registered: Apr 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
WWJD-thru-me
Member


Member Rated:
4
Icon 1 posted      Profile for WWJD-thru-me     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
This PR sounds good to me. I think the pieces of the puzzle are coming together. I am positive on the company and UC and think we will be seeing a mining company to reckon with applying for listing with full disclosure in the near future (30-90 days?)put together and filed by Roger Glenn. I predict the price will be better than .0005. At least that's how I am reading it. Still buying if it's still on sale. GLTA-DD-IMO-Debi -Good Night

Wallace -Hi -You have mail. -Debi


Posts: 1188 | From: Clinton, MA 01510 | Registered: Jan 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Wallace#1
Member


Member Rated:
4
Icon 1 posted      Profile for Wallace#1         Edit/Delete Post 
Winsum,

Try to look at as a brand new company starting out with no shares and in it's most simple form.

Board of Directors "authorizes" 10,000,000 shares to be issued for various purposes or at the discretion of management. At this point none are issued.

Subsequently, 6,000,000 shs are "issued" (may also be called "new shares") to controlling people who put up the monies to start the business. Now you would have 10,000,000 authorized shs of which 6,000,000 shares are both "issued and outstanding".

Next, suppose they have a public offering of 4,000,000 shs. Now you would have 10,000,000 shs "authorized, issued and outstanding". Generally speaking (and there are qualifications), the 4,000,000 shares sold publically would be refered to as "float" or "public float".

Now, suppose they want to acquire a company for 1,000,000 shs. In order to do so the Board of Directors would have to authorize an additional 1,000,000 shares. Once issued in exchange for the acquisition, that 1 mil shs also becomes part of the authorized, issued and outstanding. Depending upon the circumstances (to whom it is going), it may or may not become part of the public float.

Hope I have not confused you more.


Posts: 3607 | From: NJ - Outside Phila. | Registered: Mar 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Wallace#1
Member


Member Rated:
4
Icon 1 posted      Profile for Wallace#1         Edit/Delete Post 
Let's not get too smart rivercity. When you quote something, three dots (...) incorporate whatever is there into the quote. It just saves repeating the whole thing. If you go back and look at the release you will see just where I put the three dots and, therefore, left out no facts.
Besides, I figured all of you read the release.

Posts: 3607 | From: NJ - Outside Phila. | Registered: Mar 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
rivercity
Member


Rate Member
Icon 1 posted      Profile for rivercity     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
wallace, no intention of getting to smart,your staement was out of context,my misunderstanding, you intended to skip some of the info,thanks rivercity
Posts: 58 | From: austin,tx. u.s.a. | Registered: Apr 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Wallace#1
Member


Member Rated:
4
Icon 1 posted      Profile for Wallace#1         Edit/Delete Post 
No problem rivercity.
Posts: 3607 | From: NJ - Outside Phila. | Registered: Mar 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
  This topic comprises 65 pages: 1  2  3  ...  33  34  35  36  37  38  39  ...  63  64  65   

Post New Topic  New Poll  
Topic Closed  Topic Closed
Open Topic   Feature Topic   Move Topic   Delete Topic next oldest topic   next newest topic
 - Printer-friendly view of this topic
Hop To:


Contact Us | Allstocks.com Message Board Home

© 1997 - 2021 Allstocks.com. All rights reserved.

Powered by Infopop Corporation
UBB.classic™ 6.7.2

Share