posted
Paid bashers, lol. Where's my frigging check. I can't believe how foolheartedly some people can be. Disagree with their hopes, not even their position based on fact, but just mere hopes, and you're a basher.
quote:Originally posted by glassman: 45000 shareholders and only a couple of bashers...we must be pretty good.....
Posts: 4893 | From: Burbank IL USA | Registered: Feb 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by will: Paid bashers, lol. Where's my frigging check. I can't believe how foolheartedly some people can be. Disagree with their hopes, not even their position based on fact, but just mere hopes, and you're a basher.
you think this is bad, you should try politics...LOL
quote:Originally posted by Upside: Of course we've noticed. I guess more than anything I'd just like to see some of these wild theories put to rest. But, when you've got so many people who have bet the house, family, and future on this stock, they'll keep coming up with new ones right up to the end.
Bet the house??? I haven't seen anyone who announced their holdings, that have bet more than a few hundred to a couple thousand, except Debi. That's why no one is turning loose of their shares for a long time.
If this stock, makes a run, I have added shares to my originial holding block, to have for turning a quick profit, but that will be all until I see what the future has in store. I could care less about the NSS or quick profits, I want to see DIAMONDS. And I will hold until I hear the awful words. "No diamonds on hundreds of drilled sites. Gonna pull out the drills and go home."
Posts: 2 | From: Noblesville, IN | Registered: Oct 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by glassman: you think this is bad, you should try politics...LOL
Don't flatter yourself. The definition of a dividend is as follows... 1 : an individual share of something distributed: as a : a share in a pro rata distribution (as of profits) to stockholders b : a share of surplus allocated to a policyholder in a participating insurance policy 2 a : a resultant return or reward b : BONUS 3 a : a number to be divided b : a sum or fund to be divided and distributed --------------------------------------- 2 b...BONUS... is how I look at a this. I invested on CMKX not expecting to find any dividends.I invested in CMKX to find diamonds.And I'm not going anywhere untill they do.I know that they'er up there.Companies are pulling 'em out of there all the time.All around CMKX.When I bought in,I didn't even know what a naked short was.But I do now,and I don't think anything would make anyone cover any faster than a good diamond haul.
Posts: 2634 | From: The highway | Registered: Feb 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
IF A SHORT EXISTS ! Only one logical way to fix it. Remove the trading ability of CMKX stock. The MM has an infinate muber of ways and plenty of time. No hard cash has yet been required only shares. If you can short one you can probably short other related also. VAN
Posts: 1424 | From: Peoria, IL. USA | Registered: Oct 2003
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Upside: What's your opinion Noah, assuming the dividend is paid?
If the dividend is paid, my opinion is that I'll be very happy with 115 free shares of UCAD @ about $5.00 a share. (If the OTC BB numbers are correct) I can wait a year if necessary to cash in. UCAD seems like a pretty stable company.
Posts: 2 | From: Noblesville, IN | Registered: Oct 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by offshoretrader: Hey glass you sure are posting alot on this board for someone who does not trade pinks whats up with that???
offshore
one day somebody posted an alert on the naked short of the century... i started doing some DD, came over here to politely offer my opinion and got smacked...LOL now i feel obligated to drop in once in a while make sure the pumpers are being somewhat reasonable...LOL
posted
I m new to stock game I have been reading this board for at lest 3 months but never post anything. I had a thought. If St geogres minerals is giving us 200,000,000,000 ristricted shares and the pps for SGGM is .31 as of today wouldnt that be $62,000,000,000 investest into cmkx?That would be a lot of money for a company to invest if this stock was worthless. What is the deal with restricted shares can someone please explain to me the difference. I hope to learn a lot from this experiece and hoping cmkx will come through big, and if it doesnt well I enjoyed the ride. I will say that some of you peeps on here get a little worked up. This about make money not dictating your life. Money is the root of all evil ya know ... Restricted shares.....?????????
Posts: 6 | From: Greenfield , WI | Registered: Sep 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
Aone, in this case, the shares are "restricted" from sale for one year. The company can remove that restriction if it so desires, but otherwise, you must hold them for a year before selling them.
Some of us "peeps" get excited when the personal attacks start. Others get offended if you don't accept their wise advice, and get personal. I don't think it has anything to do with the money when folks get excited in here. It's a pride issue, and that "cometh before the fall".
BTW, it's not money that is the root of all evil, but the "love" of money that is.
Posts: 2 | From: Noblesville, IN | Registered: Oct 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
yea your right, the love of money is the root of all evil.. i like your posts noah and i have a lot of faith in this company ................so are the shares worth that much........$62,000,000,000 or know? Posts: 6 | From: Greenfield , WI | Registered: Sep 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
And did anyone notice when CMKX just said the word 'diamondiferuos' how fast this stocks pps rose?So I'm going to try it...diamondiferuos,diamondiferuos,diamondiferuos,diamondiferuos,diamondiferuos...NOW RAISE,pps,RAISE! Oh well,it was worth a try.
[This message has been edited by highwaychild (edited September 20, 2004).]
Posts: 2634 | From: The highway | Registered: Feb 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
Aone, it's just my opinion, but I think we may see CMKX moved into SGGM at some point. Their AS is 950 billion. After giving CMKX 200 billion, they now have approx 750 billion left to issue. If the CMKX OS is about 800 billion as some suspect, this number is about perfect for a one to one trade with CMKX shareholders. As far as the evaluation of those shares given to uCMKX, they are restricted and cannot be sold for a year. So they will not have any actual or tradeable value for a year or until the restriction is removed. If or when that restriction is removed and 200 billion shares become tradeable, the pps will drop like a ton of bricks, if real value has not been established in SGGM that would justify that kind of pps.
[This message has been edited by noahltl (edited September 20, 2004).]
Posts: 2 | From: Noblesville, IN | Registered: Oct 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
Ohhhhhhhhhh it ought to be good.Could you tape it for me Noah.Just kidding.I'm sure I can find the replay,I got to work tomarrow.I'm gone.
Posts: 2634 | From: The highway | Registered: Feb 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
Wonder about why our core sample results are taking so long? Look what our Shore Gold neighbors are saying about core sample manipulations by the "big boys".
bluediamonds Global Moderator Re: Debeers was hiding core results « Reply #1 on: Today at 7:04pm »
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Just what I've been saying to detwin and other naysayers (bashers?):
SGSA Update The following letter was submitted to the Competition Bureau of Industry Canada by a Shore Gold investor and a member of the Shore Gold Shareholders Association. The member requested that this letter be posted on the Shore Gold Shareholders Association website for the interest of other investors. It is not necessarily the opinions of all members of the Association.
From: [removed] To: compbureau@ic.gc.ca Sent: Tuesday, August 22, 2000 6:49 AM Subject: Complaint re: reporting of results of diamond drill-cores, Kensington mining JV
Good morning. My name is [removed]. I am from [removed]. I am an investor in a junior diamond-exploration company in Saskatchewan called Shore Gold, Inc. This company staked a claim to property in the Fort a la Corne area of Saskatchewan (about 50 km east of Prince Albert) in approximately 1995, when the Saskatchewan Government released the Crown Land for mining exploration, when it was no longer needed (a dam had been planned that was deemed unnecessary, I infer). Shore Gold beat its competitors (a joint venture operation) to the punch by having one of its employees stay up all night so that Shore Gold could be "first in line" when the land-claims office opened for business the morning after the announcement. This story may be apocryphal, but it underscores the competitiveness of exploration in this area because of favourable aerial magnetic surveys that had suggested the presence of Kimberlite, the diamond-bearing rock named after the original deposits discovered in South Africa a century or more ago.
Kensington Mining, out of Vancouver, is in a joint-venture operation with its partners, Monopros (the Canadian DeBeers subsidiary) and two minor partners. Each of the aforenamed majors holds 38% of the joint venture. I believe they have been drilling on an exploratory basis since about 1990. Their property is immediately-adjacent to Shore Gold's property.
I became an investor in Shore Gold in late May or early June after the stock was recommended by a small-cap mutual-fund manager wrote about his favourite speculative plays in the mining industry. His name is Bob Boaz, and he manages University Avenue Mutual Funds in Toronto. I had done extensive "due diligence" on the stock, including reading the "bull-boards" on "Stockhouse.ca", an internet website dedicated to investing in stock-markets around the world. Some investors post messages on the message-board (aforementioned "bullboards"). Their comments were that the management of Shore Gold, including the Chief Executive Officer (CEO) Ken McNeil, had done an excellent job in exploring the property they had staked out, and that the "Star Kimberlite", a geological formation they had mapped out with aerial-magnetic survey results and with ground survey results, showed real promise in becoming a mineable area. Diamond drill-core samples had been pulled out of the ground (using two different calibres of drilling, the larger approximating 3 3/4 inches, and these drill-core samples had been sent away to Kennecot Mining's assay laboratory in Thunder Bay. Earlier smaller drill-core samples showed the presence of macrodiamonds (diamonds with size of 0.5 mm or more in any one of its dimensions) a finding that warrants further exploration by means of "bulk sampling", or analysing a large sample of rock mined with a 24" drill, a much more expensive proposition.
The basis of my COMPLAINT to you has to do with the Joint Venture Kensington mining, which is immediately next-door to the Shore Gold site. In fact, it looks like the two exploration-companies may overlie the same geological formation. Kensington's diamond drill-core results were consistently reported as NOT containing mineable grades of diamonds. They had been assayed at one of the partners' laboratories, as I understand it, Monopros' laboratory in, I believe, Edmonton. When Shore Gold reported results that warranted larger calibre drill-core testing of the "Star Kimberlite" formation Kensington is purported to have demanded of its partners that the samples be retested. Upon retesting of the samples, or at least of the tailings of the samples (dammit, Jim, I'm a doctor, not a bloody Mining Engineer!), lo and behold, the results revealed that, by gum, there WERE mineable quantities of macrodiamonds, so much so that the joint venture immediately announced that they were proceeding to a bulk-sample test with a 24" drill! Moreover Kensington has demanded of its partner(s) that the other samples dating to 1997 and possibly right back to 1990 be retested by a different laboratory. I infer that any reputable mining concern retains portions of the core-samples in a "library" for just this purpose. Kensington also demanded that they retain the right to have any bulk-sample material tested in a laboratory of its own choosing, should they so desire.
A number of investors in Shore Gold have expressed their concern and alarm about the propriety of the actions of certain partners in the Kensington joint venture. In light of what is perceived as aggressive actions by DeBeers (Monopros' parent) in the takeover of Winspear Resources at Snap Lake in the NWT (hostile takeover), speculation has grown that Monopros was restricting competition by attempting to sequester favourable results at the Kensington joint venture at Fort a la Corne. Some posters have launched their own informal investigation by contacting the mining consultant who lives in Belgium to ask what the likelihood is that repeated samples would fail to reveal their contents in a reputable lab like Monopros'. They were told that the Sortex machine used to recover diamonds, when properly calibrated, recovers 99% of the diamonds present in a sample, especially when used in tandem with a "grease table", apparently standard-procedure in an assay-laboratory. Even when the diamonds are deemed to be "low-reflective" under a polarized light (I'm way over my head here) the Sortex table recovers 90% of the diamonds in the sample. The mining consultant was non-commital regarding an opinion about the apparent discrepancy in the Kensington joint-venture reports.
My COMPLAINT is that Monopros appears to have "botched" or "fudged" the results of the drill-core samples in order to control supply and demand of diamonds as part of their participation in the "diamond cartel" that operates throughout the world. Canada is projected to become one of the main diamond-mining countries in the 21st century. DeBeers wants to retain its status as the largest diamond-mining company in the world. They have already launched hostile takeovers of Winspear Resources, and Ashton mining (an Australian mining company with properties in Canada). They own 38% of the Kensington joint-venture. This is expected to rise to 45% after the completion of the bulk-sampling because Monopros, their subsidiary, is paying the lion's share of the bulk-sample costs. I believe Monopros/DeBeers wanted the diamonds in Fort a la Corne to lie fallow until it suited them to exploit the resource. In my opinion, this is a form of restricting competition. The basis of my complaint rests on the issue of the "fudging" of the results. I believe that this warrants an investigation by the Competition Bureau. How often are results of drill-core samples incorrect? Why does it appear that this occurred on samples dating back at least to 1997, if not 1990? Does the mining consultant (Luc Rombuts (sp?)) in Belgium have an explanation?
I would be pleased to supply the reference material to assist you in an investigation, if you deem it appropriate to proceed. One internet website from England has reported the story, and they are very critical of what has gone on at the Kensington joint-venture. Their name is Minesite.com, and the URL is http://minesite.com . May I suggest that you begin there?
quote:Originally posted by Tgrant: I dont own this stock or realy follow the thread, but this past weekend I was in Reading pennsylvania for the Lucas oil Nationals. when I was walking through the pits i saw the CMKX extreme machine. i was very surpsrised to see it, they were running in the event. they also had a big rig and a hummer h2 all letered up with "casavant mining, got cmkx?" just thought I would let you all know, good luck
Extreme Machine has had this set-up for a while now, the Hummer looks real trick, doesn't it? Those decals/paint cost a pretty penny. I cannot believe how many handout packs they give up. I swear, EVERY person that walks by gets one thrust into their arms. When I saw so many simply tossed in the trash by uninterested parties.... what a wa$te. It is tradition to gather your own hero cards; YOUR own favorites to support. I admire their boldness. I woudn't have the guts to hawk like that.
Posts: 81 | From: St Louis MO | Registered: Aug 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
Using tradingpennys sources, I was able to dig up some info of interest.
Vici (Casavant) Curran – IR at SGGM
Curran, Kevin Patrick *Northern Star Resources Inc. *Petro Plus Inc (the outfit that UC was with).
Note that UC also listed with Northern Star Resources Note that Beverly Ann Casavant also listed with Northern Star Resources Note: See below results for Northern Star Resources.
Officers/Directors SGGM: Robertson, C. B. Atikokan Resources Inc. *St. George Metals, Inc.
Barry, Frank R. Williams Creek Explorations Limited *St. George Metals, Inc.
Nesbit, Harrison Horseshoe Gold Mining Inc. *St. George Metals, Inc.
James A. McGlasson – not available
Wade, Neal O. *St. George Metals, Inc.
Hoffman, William H. *St. George Metals, Inc. ------------- Looked up Northern Star Resources. It brought up Explor Resources Inc (CDNX). Officers/Directors as follows: Position Duane Michael Studer Director of the Board Secretary/Treasurer Randall Thomas Studer President Director of the Board Robert Ayotte Director of the Board Q: Wasn't Randall Studer also involved with that company UC left under unknown circumstances? Petro Plus? Q: Not sure, but isn't Studer also involved with the drilling company CMKX is using?
Not finished digging. Let's see what we can find on Explor Resources Inc (CDNX). ------------- Found Explor Res Inc with symbol of CA:EXS...not much information.
[This message has been edited by Wallace#1 (edited September 21, 2004).]
[This message has been edited by Wallace#1 (edited September 21, 2004).]
EXPLOR RESOURCES INC. ("EXS") [formerly Odaat Inc. ("ODT.A")] BULLETIN TYPE: Name Change and Consolidation BULLETIN DATE: January 28, 2004 TSX Venture Tier 2 Company
Pursuant to a special resolution passed by shareholders December 29, 2003, the Company has consolidated its capital on a 4 old for 1 new basis. The name of the Company has also been changed from Odaat Inc. to Explor Resources Inc.
Effective at the opening Thursday January 29, 2004, the common shares of Explor Resources Inc. will commence trading on TSX Venture Exchange, and the common shares of Odaat Inc. will be delisted. The Company is classified as a 'Mining (Except Oil & Gas)' company.
Post - Consolidation Capitalization: Unlimited shares with no par value of which 1,873,562 shares are issued and outstanding Escrow: 8,300 shares
Information earlier showed Gregory Leia as their lawyer. I think he was the lawyer for UC et al in that litigation posted by tradingpennys. Also note Odaat Inc...was also listed under Beverly Casavant.
quote:Originally posted by Wallace#1: [B]Using tradingpennys sources, I was able to dig up some info of interest.
Vici (Casavant) Curran – IR at SGGM
Curran, Kevin Patrick *Northern Star Resources Inc. *Petro Plus Inc (the outfit that UC was with).
Note that UC also listed with Northern Star Resources Note that Beverly Ann Casavant also listed with Northern Star Resources Note: See below results for Northern Star Resources.
Officers/Directors SGGM: Robertson, C. B. Atikokan Resources Inc. *St. George Metals, Inc.
Barry, Frank R. Williams Creek Explorations Limited *St. George Metals, Inc.
Nesbit, Harrison Horseshoe Gold Mining Inc. *St. George Metals, Inc.
James A. McGlasson – not available
Wade, Neal O. *St. George Metals, Inc.
Hoffman, William H. *St. George Metals, Inc. ------------- Looked up Northern Star Resources. It brought up Explor Resources Inc (CDNX). Officers/Directors as follows: Position Duane Michael Studer Director of the Board Secretary/Treasurer Randall Thomas Studer President Director of the Board Robert Ayotte Director of the Board Q: Wasn't Randall Studer also involved with that company UC left under unknown circumstances? Petro Plus? Q: Not sure, but isn't Studer also involved with the drilling company CMKX is using?
Not finished digging. Let's see what we can find on Explor Resources Inc (CDNX). ------------- Found Explor Res Inc with symbol of CA:EXS...not much information.
[B]
Glad someone is looking at it. Pretty wild huh? Very VERY interwoven. Posts: 415 | From: CA | Registered: Jun 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
Check out the info. at the right hand corner where it says "Navagation Options" drop down the list. Like financing...
Posts: 415 | From: CA | Registered: Jun 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
if there is a naked short the mm's told cmkx to shove it back on the own by date in aug. they can not buy restricted shares of ucad and they can't use common shares in their place unless the restriction is lifted before the pay date. so any squeeze is over. i wouldn't even count on the 24th being the pay date any more as that might have been changed. if you notice we are less then 10 days from the gemm pay date and no word about the split yet. no word on if they took up the option on the other 24% of gemm either. for whatever reason cmkx has decided the stockholder does not need to know anything. maybe because cmkx knows that shareholders will not sell till its either worthless or they are rich no matter what the company does. and i'm one of them that feels just that way.
Posts: 3651 | From: Algonac, MI. 48001 | Registered: Jun 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by noahltl: Aone, it's just my opinion, but I think we may see CMKX moved into SGGM at some point. Their AS is 950 billion. After giving CMKX 200 billion, they now have approx 750 billion left to issue. If the CMKX OS is about 800 billion as some suspect, this number is about perfect for a one to one trade with CMKX shareholders. As far as the evaluation of those shares given to uCMKX, they are restricted and cannot be sold for a year. So they will not have any actual or tradeable value for a year or until the restriction is removed. If or when that restriction is removed and 200 billion shares become tradeable, the pps will drop like a ton of bricks, if real value has not been established in SGGM that would justify that kind of pps.
[This message has been edited by noahltl (edited September 20, 2004).]
Noah & Aone,
I am not an expert at this but I believe the float for SGGM may be fairly small, which would explain the rapid rise in PPS when the news came out about the 5% deal with CMKX. However, when they release the 200b shares, don't they become part of the SGGM float and cause a heavy dilution of SGGM's PPS? Or is the float in the hundreds of billions now which would mean that there won't be much dilution and the stock will hold its value? I would appreciate your opinions.
Message: Dear Mr. xxxxxxxxxx According to our records, CMKM Diamonds had scheduled 2004 dividends with pay dates of September 24 ($0.00000960), and October 1 ($0.02560000). Please note that these rates are approximate and can change. At this time, the dividends are on hold, and we have not received verification from the company to indicate if they will be paid. I am sorry that we do not have any additional information at this time.
If you have any other questions or comments, please send us another message at any time. We appreciate your business.
RE: UCAD dividend From: Fidelity To: xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Date: 8/25/2004 5:19 AM
Message: Dear Mr. xxxxxxxxx:
According to my records, you will receive 15.5 shares for each one million shares of CMKX you own. If you have any other questions or comments, please send us another message at any time.
quote:Originally posted by Money_Penny: Noah & Aone,
I am not an expert at this but I believe the float for SGGM may be fairly small, which would explain the rapid rise in PPS when the news came out about the 5% deal with CMKX. However, when they release the 200b shares, don't they become part of the SGGM float and cause a heavy dilution of SGGM's PPS? Or is the float in the hundreds of billions now which would mean that there won't be much dilution and the stock will hold its value? I would appreciate your opinions.
Money, the 200 billion would go into the float when the restriction is lifted and that's why the pps would drop dramatically, without proven valuation.
From investopedia:
Float The total number of shares publicly owned and available for trading. The float is calculated by subtracting restricted shares from outstanding shares.
For example, a company may have 10 million outstanding shares, but only 7 million are trading on the stock market. So, the float would be 7 million.
[This message has been edited by noahltl (edited September 21, 2004).]
Posts: 2 | From: Noblesville, IN | Registered: Oct 2004
| IP: Logged |
Does anyone know what the float is for SGGM at this time? Have there been any speculations as to how much dilution will occur when the 200b hit the market?
Topic Closed
UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!
Printer-friendly view of this topic
...
Pretty wild huh? Very VERY interwoven.
