posted
UCAD before they switched operations(formely BARRINGTON FOODS INTL BFII) was trading between .02 and .04!
Posts: 1458 | From: Ohio | Registered: Mar 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
lol... right, so companies who file NT's are all trying to be delisted? Let's get real now. Dozens of companies on the OTCBB, even those with revenues and even small profits file NT's. That is not uncommon, and if you have major acquisitions going on or changes in your financial/share structure situation, it is very difficult to get everything in order on time.
If they really wanted to simply become delisted, they would have not filed the NT and just immediately been delisted to the pinks. No reason to even file the NT unless they intended to file.
posted
Yes, I have been in CMKM/CMKX for a year now, and I've followed most of the developments. Maybe there is some crazy sort of merger going on with UC and UCAD, but delisting to the pinks as part of the plan is not something I would embrace, considering they are supposed to be working towards being fulling reporting, as has been mentioned plenty of times now.
Posts: 1051 | From: Michigan | Registered: Sep 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
some of us are a little skeptical about the outcome of the mergers...that's all... we haven't exactly been treated very nicely by some of the longs...
do you have an opinion on what the float is????
[This message has been edited by glassman (edited August 17, 2004).]
I'm not one to think there is some crazy naked short thing going on making the O/S less than 100B. While I'm not 100% sure the 438 or whatever Billion that a few sites have reported due to the dividend.. I think the O/S could be 400B. I'm inclined to think it is a bit lower, maybe only 250B, but only time will tell, and we at least have a date now where we will know for sure.
I wouldn't get yourself confused with the "longs" and the "pumpers" though. The longs, such as myself who have been in it for a full year understand what is at stake, and the realistic possibilities. The people who just bought in a few months ago have nothing to go on other than what they read on message boards, and they take everything they read as the truth
posted
i wish you good luck with it. and yes the pumping has been unbelievable.... a lot of perspectives have been distorted....
Posts: 36378 | From: USA | Registered: Sep 2003
| IP: Logged |
UCAD filed for an extension on their 10Q financial filings. The reports are not finished and they want some more time. They filed for this extension this morning and it was signed yesterday.
Some are suggesting that this could be a result of the meetings that have been going on in Saskatchewan this past week and that possibly some deals have been cut that have altered the financial status of UCAD significantly, in a good way.
Others are saying this is standard procedure for UCAD as they have been late many times and not to read too much into the late filing.
Either way it is only a guess, but a nice find by Paul for sure.
Thanks Paul.
Hope this helps Battlestar.
Dr.D
Posts: 2 | From: Noblesville, IN | Registered: Oct 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
how could this have happened many times? they just became UCAD this year.... but you are correct, this happens all the time and i am being rude..... so sorry.... i guess there's no naked short squeeze by the MM's tho....maybe next dividend?
just trying to get the story straight...
[This message has been edited by glassman (edited August 17, 2004).]
posted
Now that's a float (between 200 - 250 bil) that makes more sense to me because it would or could still leave UC and family in control. Assuming 500 bil authorized and most issued (and that is really an assumption), with the Casavants in control, that would be about the 480 plus or minus shs everyone keeps talking about.
Somehow I just cannot see a combination between CMKX and UCAD. Could be wrong, but it doesn't seem to carry an advantage either way.
[This message has been edited by Wallace#1 (edited August 17, 2004).]
posted
does it make sence to split most shares if not all in 2 companies, nevada % juinia, plus shares in each other and then a merger? why not just merge. save all the expence & trouble of the other moves
Posts: 3651 | From: Algonac, MI. 48001 | Registered: Jun 2004
| IP: Logged |
UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!
Printer-friendly view of this topic
