posted
U S Cdn Minerals Inc (OTC BB: UCAD) Last Update: 3:32:00 PM ET Oct 6, 2004
U.S. Canadian Minerals Inc. Announces Financier Cleared for Trading on London Stock Exchange
LAS VEGAS, Oct 6, 2004 (BUSINESS WIRE) -- U.S. Canadian Minerals Inc. (UCAD) announced today that Langley Park Investment Trust Plc was admitted to the Full List of the London Stock Exchange and that dealings in Langley shares will commence on Oct. 7, 2004. U.S. Canadian had previously signed an agreement with Langley to engage in a transaction for the funding of the company. The agreement calls for the purchase, by Langley, of U.S. Canadian Minerals Inc. common shares, valued at the time of the closing at $9,005,355 USD, in exchange for shares of the investment company.
Langley has been established specifically to invest in U.S. micro cap companies with long-term growth potential.
Langley has entered into a "lock-up" agreement with U.S. Canadian Minerals Inc. pursuant to which it has agreed not to trade U.S. Canadian Minerals Inc. shares it will receive as a result of this transaction for a period of two years from the closing date. In full payment for the shares of U.S. Canadian Minerals Inc., Langley will issue to U.S. Canadian Minerals Inc. $9,005,355 USD equivalent of its shares at a price per share valued at One Pound Sterling.
Fifty percent of Langley's shares issued to U.S. Canadian Minerals Inc. will be held in escrow for two years following their issuance and in the event the per share market price of U.S. Canadian Minerals Inc. common stock at such time is less than the per share value of U.S. Canadian Minerals Inc. stock at the time of the closing, Langley shall be entitled to the return out of escrow a percentage of the investment company's shares equal to the market value of such decline. The remaining shares held in escrow shall be released to U.S. Canadian Minerals Inc. at the time of any such release back to Langley.
Posts: 1872 | From: right here | Registered: Apr 2004
| IP: Logged |
"that Urban has given up total control of his company, since he wasn't receiving dividends. FAT CHANCE HE DID THAT." -------------------------------------------
Agreed. Very possible UC has some type of voting arrangement such as Pfd shs which could still control CMKX and always outvote the common shs.
Another possibility is that other family members and he still retain control...the majority of it with the family members (including his wife and children). All he would have to do is sign the certificates over to them prior to that announcement.
posted
noahltl Member posted October 06, 2004 15:10 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Could be a good day. Got my dividend at Ameritrade. They say that they got them from DTC. This raises the question as to why they didn't get them directly from the TA. Ameritrade also says they are using the ratios from OTC BB, just as they have been. My ratio was 9.6 per million. That means they did not round up as promised by the PR. At that ratio, the OS would be 779,625,779,625. That means that with an AS of 800 billion, that Urban has given up total control of his company, since he wasn't receiving dividends. FAT CHANCE HE DID THAT. So looks like we are back to square one of guessing on the true OS. ==================================
well we do now know the o/s as of aug 20th. it doesn't matter what UC got or not as to this dividend. the split says the o/s can not be less then 779.6 billion. what is not good is that 2 days before the a/s was 500 billion. so UC increased the a/s by 300 billion and in 2 days got rid of 279 billion of those shares. if you remeber aug. 18th was the day the a/s was increased. thats $111,600,000 of shares sold in 2 days at the .0004 it was then $83,700,000 if sold at .0003. now my question is why the need for funding? also since it seems all shares are restricted then there was no naked short as the shares bought yesterday on the open market are not restricted and thus if used to cover would show up in accounts as unrestricted.
[This message has been edited by bill1352 (edited October 06, 2004).]
posted
bill352, looks and sounds factual to me. How long do you think it will take for the believers to shoot holes in those facts you just posted?
779.6+ Billion O/S has already been challenged. noah wrote: "So looks like we are back to square one of guessing on the true OS."
No NSS Well, that has been challenged plenty already. The UCAD run yesterday is what they'll use to prove it. They don't believe there is a difference between restricted and nonrestricted. Maybe they can sell their restricted then?
Posts: 4893 | From: Burbank IL USA | Registered: Feb 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
they are already hopelessly trying but the truth always hurts. there are no facts coming from cmkx but there are enough from real sources to piece a few things together. we know from stockwatch (stockwatch got the number from the state of nevada) that CIM was only authorized 25 million shares yet UC says the dividend was to be 40 billion. odds are he cut the dividend to 20 billion thus at some point he has to file with nevada to increase the a/s of CIM public company or not its law. the gemm split which just came out a few days ago works out to 779 billion, back up proof. the part the faithful wont accept is that these numbers come right from cmkx. they are the ones that file the dividend splits with the SEC which is where OTCBB gets its postings
Posts: 3651 | From: Algonac, MI. 48001 | Registered: Jun 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
noah...call ameritrade talk to the dividend division. i did on the 24th when ucad was first to come out and asked the same thing you just said. the guy told me blocks of 10 to 50 billion get sold without ever getting into the days volume all the time. plus if the a/s is 500 billion on the 17th gets raised to 800 billion on the 18th and then on the 20th the o/s is 779 billion what else can explain it.
Posts: 3651 | From: Algonac, MI. 48001 | Registered: Jun 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
i'll give you this noah...maybe there was a naked short of about 300 billion, maybe 400 billion & UC found out the whole truth in the numbers so he raised the a/s to cover the naked short for the mm's and got paid by them for the shares or just did it out of the goodness of his heart, for the shareholders. does that make it any better?
Posts: 3651 | From: Algonac, MI. 48001 | Registered: Jun 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
It's obvious that since the longs left that this thread wants to believe the worst about CMKX. What I believe is that we still don't know what has been going on in the background. This is not just a trading stock, it is a stock whose future is being guided by a top Wall Street attorney. There are serious problems going on at the DTC. If some here would DD that, instead of trying to find some obscure lawsuit against a JV principal, they would find that many companies have applied to the SEC to be REMOVED from the DTC. Research that one, and you might have some clues about what is going on as we speak. IMO
Posts: 2 | From: Noblesville, IN | Registered: Oct 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
Pardon the newbie from butting in, but if it helps, I am holding 27,000,000 CMKX at .0001, and my account was just credited with 259 UCAD restricted shares. Math was never my strong point, but maybe somebody can make something out of that. Ed
Posts: 1772 | From: Oxford, PA, USA | Registered: Oct 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
i agree with the problems in the DTC noah and i am long and holding. i still believe i'll make a nice profit but the facts are the facts even if they didn't come from a press release. read the rules...all dividends to be paid must be reported to the SEC not the DTC also ameritrade said all dividends get put into their account from the DTC which gets them from in the case of shares from the t/a. i do agree that the mm's & the DTC could pass along cover shares bought by the mm's to the broker street accounts but they can't restrict them. to prove a naked short we need proof of ppl with unrestricted shares of ucad in their accounts
Posts: 3651 | From: Algonac, MI. 48001 | Registered: Jun 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
ed19363 New Member posted October 06, 2004 17:02 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Pardon the newbie from butting in, but if it helps, I am holding 27,000,000 CMKX at .0001, and my account was just credited with 259 UCAD restricted shares. Math was never my strong point, but maybe somebody can make something out of that. Ed =====================================
259 ucad shares divided by 27 million = 9.59 per million. the exact split announced
posted
Do any of these numbers relate to the O/S, or is that something we will have to wait for from CMKX??
Posts: 1772 | From: Oxford, PA, USA | Registered: Oct 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
ucad gave 7,500,000 shares to cmkx for this dividend if you divided the 7.5 million number by the split number you get how many cmkx shares got the dividend thus the 779 billion o/s number
Posts: 3651 | From: Algonac, MI. 48001 | Registered: Jun 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
Thanks, Bill, wish I knew more about these things, but I'm accustomed to dealing with larger stocks that pay cash dividends. May as well ask another question, if you dont mind. Restricted shares (if I understand) have no value, so how long will it be before they become un-restricted? I also have 2 million restricted shares of Casavant mining, and they show no value either.
Posts: 1772 | From: Oxford, PA, USA | Registered: Oct 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
I saw a close of .0002, not "the squeeze of the century". Maybe the "nonsqueeze of the century".
Posts: 4893 | From: Burbank IL USA | Registered: Feb 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by bill1352: ucad gave 7,500,000 shares to cmkx for this dividend if you divided the 7.5 million number by the split number you get how many cmkx shares got the dividend thus the 779 billion o/s number
If I'm not mistaken Rendal Williams was quoted the other day as saying that UC could pay the dividend using the numbers for the A/S, O/S, or the "float", whichever he chooses. It looks like he chose the A/S which still leaves us with not knowing the O/S or the float, retired shares, or anything else. I'm still betting the O/S is low!! IMHO!!!
NanoSignal Corp. to Issue Special 20% Restricted Stock Dividend Wednesday October 6, 1:24 pm ET
LAS VEGAS--(BUSINESS WIRE)--Oct. 6, 2004--NanoSignal Corp. (Pink Sheets: NNOS - News) has determined, after an extensive review of a detailed shareholder audit, conclusive and stunning documented proof of the market making activity involving the approximately 7,000 mystery names of various DTC and NOBO lists obtained by the company document that many names obtained by the company are not shareholders. To address this very troubling issue, NanoSignal Corp. called a special meeting of legal, accounting and forensic experts together with litigators to discuss this problem and how to resolve this dramatic event. One conclusion approved by the board of directors is to issue a special one time 20% restricted stock dividend to our known shareholders as of Nov. 3, 2004.
The results of this special 20% restricted stock dividend, when issued to proven shareholders who actually do tender their recognized and verified certificates to the company's transfer agent, should prove that although the company can identify approximately 240,000,000 issued shares, other records tend to indicate that there are an additional 500,000,000 shares allegedly held in Street and retirement accounts that regrettably are not recorded shareholders of ours at our transfer agent. To resolve this presumed imbalance of sales to the unsuspecting, NanoSignal Corp. will be issuing a special 20% restricted stock dividend to those actual verified shareholders of record at the transfer agent only.
Details of the pending distribution of restricted shares will be filed in sufficient time to allow newly designed certificates to be issued along with new restricted dividend share certificates from the transfer agent to the actual proven owners of record. "We wish to reward real shareholders while also keeping in mind our desire to provide better security for our real shareholders we are redesigning our share certificates and issuing new ones in conjunction with this special dividend," stated Sir Rupert Perrin, chairman of NanoSignal.
About NanoSignal Corp.
NanoSignal Corp. is a medical technology company introducing its patented Slices(TM) technology to the MRI industry, allowing radiologists and technologists to perform advanced imaging features beyond the capabilities of the standard MRI computer.
This press release contains "forward-looking statements" within the meaning of the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995. Such statements can be identified by the lead-in "Looking Forward." These statements are not guarantees of future performance and involve significant risks and uncertainties. Actual results may vary materially from those in the forward-looking statements as a result of the effectiveness of management's strategies and decisions, general economic and business conditions, new or modified statutory or regulatory requirements, and changing price and market conditions. No assurance can be given that these are all the factors that could cause actual results to vary materially from the forward-looking statement.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Contact: NanoSignal Corp. investor@nanosignalcorp.com or Princeton Research Inc. for NanoSignal
Posts: 2 | From: Noblesville, IN | Registered: Oct 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
if they used the o/s the split would be differant it would be .000009375. the split today was .0000096 thus they could not have used the a/s. if they did thats even worse...it means the purposely increased the a/s 2 days before the own by date by 300 billion. i'd say that kind of move is not sharteholder friendly. you might disagree but cutting a dividnd by 300 billion shares 2 day before is wrong.
as for the restriction...we dont knoiw when it will be lifted
[This message has been edited by bill1352 (edited October 06, 2004).]
posted
Noah, I agree with you, there are people here that for whatever reason don't want this stock to succeed, I however am not one of them. I want this thing to fly to the lofty heights that many have predicted. Wanting though is not an excuse to turn a blind eye to the facts surrounding this company. I'm in this now for 1,400 dollars, a lot to some, a pittance to others either way, I however can't let it cloud my objectivity. You bring up the focus on the negative with this thread but if you look at them, they are for the most part grounded in fact and history. The longs or believers (and there's still plenty of them here) are basing their hopes on wild theorys and ridiculous assumptions that have never happened in the entire history of the stock market. Regarding my post about the races the other day, it was an impartial post with the exception of the Green Baron gentleman which I did on purpose to prove a point. The believers in this company will latch on to anything they can to discredit any negative statement. What did you, Workaholic, and others do? You jumped on that one point yet failed to mention that I prefaced my comment with a "judging on looks" statement. Who's clouding the truth here? Regarding the digging up of obscure lawsuits comment, If I could find a site that showed Urban was up for a humanitarian award or had done good deeds in the past, I would post those as well. Believe me, we share the same want for this stock, I just believe in looking at both sides of the story, good and bad.
Posts: 5729 | From: Wisconsin | Registered: Sep 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
The facts are in our accounts in black and white, and yet there is still denial. There wasn't any "sqeeze of the century", sorry to say, I was hoping I was wrong.
Posts: 4893 | From: Burbank IL USA | Registered: Feb 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
Let me just explain quickly. When the story unfolds, you can bash me if I'm wrong. I think everyone knows that there is a naked shorting problem. If you don't think it is true for CMKX, at least admit that the hundreds of companies bringing lawsuits against the MM's have some proof of their claim. Look above at what I posted from Nano Signal. Many, many, companies are having to go this route.
If you can believe that naked shorting is a reality, then you would also have to agree that for it to be widespread, that the DTC has to be involved and complicit.
Today, our shares in UCAD were distributed by the DTC according to what numbers. Ours or theirs? Can anyone see a trap being sprung? Can anyone else see that this "Squeeze" is actually coming down on the DTC as well as the MM's?
Posts: 2 | From: Noblesville, IN | Registered: Oct 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
noah...i do not disagree with you. the mm's & the DTC are criminal. i've emailed both my congressman & house rep about it. and we might find out in the next few days that ppl did not get ucad shares. maybe the DTC knew which shares were naked & they got unrestricted ucad shares today. but there are certain facts that can't be escaped
1) the otc split number comes from the SEC who gets this number from cmkx. if cmkx is playing honest this is the way it worked. ameritrade is my broker, it was them that explained to me how it works it is also has been posted in cmkx threads before, the SEC rules about dividends
2) if the a/s was used the split would have been 8.5 not the 9.6 we got. do the math
3) 2 days before the own by date cmkx raised its a/s by 300 billion shares. 279 billion of these shares showed up in the ucad split. why or who got the money we don't know. we do know our dividend and o/s was diluted by 279 billion from the a/s as of aug. 17th
noah & whoever else, i think all of you are not stupid ppl for any split number to get used it had to come from UC. lets say these 279 billion are not in the o/s. that means he just diluted our dividends by 279 billion. is there any reason to make that a good thing? in the shareholders interest?. i'm not trying to bash cmkx. these are just putting the facts that many ppl, positve ones & negitive ones have spent time & effort to put together
quote:Originally posted by noahltl: Let me just explain quickly. When the story unfolds, you can bash me if I'm wrong. I think everyone knows that there is a naked shorting problem. If you don't think it is true for CMKX, at least admit that the hundreds of companies bringing lawsuits against the MM's have some proof of their claim. Look above at what I posted from Nano Signal. Many, many, companies are having to go this route.
If you can believe that naked shorting is a reality, then you would also have to agree that for it to be widespread, that the DTC has to be involved and complicit.
Today, our shares in UCAD were distributed by the DTC according to what numbers. Ours or theirs? Can anyone see a trap being sprung? Can anyone else see that this "Squeeze" is actually coming down on the DTC as well as the MM's?
Noah, if you are right then UC is TRULY a Robin Hood..... if you are right i will be the FIRST to apologize to you and esp. DEBI......
i am a SKEPTICAL optimist. i agree that there are NS issues all over the penny market, but i still don't see the numbers in CMKX trading to support these claims....
posted
Noah, I agree that there is a naked short problem, to what extent should be debated by others more knowledgable than you or I. What bothers me is that so many are banking on the fact that Urban & Mr. Glenn are going to make history and expose the whole mess. Again, this would be unprecented in the history of the market and a tiny pink sheet company is going to bring it all to light? I just have a difficult time swallowing that.
[This message has been edited by Upside (edited October 06, 2004).]
posted
anybody know why etrade is not showing any ucad divy? Ive had my cmkx cince april and may.
Posts: 20 | From: Wailuku, Hawaii, USA | Registered: Jan 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Doctoall: Weird things going on today: E-trade just showed a price of 0.0009 and a days high of 0.0020. Anyone care to speculate as to what is happening with CMKX today besides getting ready to sky rocket!!!!!!!!!
posted
trading...we missed our chance!!!!!! lets see $51 X 2 million minus taxes & commision ya i could except that profit margin...lol
Posts: 3651 | From: Algonac, MI. 48001 | Registered: Jun 2004
| IP: Logged |
(1)"it is a stock whose future is being guided by a top Wall Street attorney. (2)There are serious problems going on at the DTC. (3)If some here would DD that, instead of trying to find some obscure lawsuit against a JV principal," ---------------------------------------------
1) "Guided"?? Then, why didn't he DEMAND disclosure of the increase in authorized? He had to know the impact when found out or leaked out! That does NOT sound much like a "top Wall Street attorney" to me.
(2)You mentioned hundreds of companies. Is that true or is it an exaggeration? I have seen no evidence of "hundreds of companies", whether going after the MMs or the DTC with lawsuits.
(3)"an obscure lawsuit against a JV partner"?? As I understand the FACTS, it is not the only lawsuit. Apparently that company (MHM Company, he was Pres. and signed all documents) was selling something where they guaranteed a 20 to 1 return...and that is not a SCAM? If you were investigating Dhnoau as a police detective, is that what you would conclude with such evidence? Obscure? How many others might he have been involved with? ------------------------------------------ ------------------------------------------
I doubt there are few, if any, on this thread who do not want CMKX to succeed. Some see the majority of the FACTS directed toward a BK situation or worse. For my part, I do not care one way or the other. I do wish many of the hopeful lots of luck.
Pay attention to what Bill1352 is saying about the issued and outstanding shs amount! THAT is just ONE more key reason CMKX is going down (.0002 today). It appears to be nothing more than a circus act or shell game! What a book this one will make!!!
[This message has been edited by Wallace#1 (edited October 06, 2004).]
[This message has been edited by Wallace#1 (edited October 06, 2004).]
posted
Ok, admittedly I haven't been following... not done DD on UCAD. it's such a circus in here.
if it's too lame a question, I apologize..
but what are we supposed to do with these shares of US CANADIAN MINERALS INC RESTRICTED that just showed up in our accounts that have no assigned value?
posted
They are restricted. You cannot trade them until the restriction is lifted. The company has not advised when that will be. So, you have to just let them sit there, when they become free trading they will assign the value at that time.
quote:Originally posted by betting babe: Ok, admittedly I haven't been following... not done DD on UCAD. it's such a circus in here.
if it's too lame a question, I apologize..
but what are we supposed to do with these shares of US CANADIAN MINERALS INC RESTRICTED that just showed up in our accounts that have no assigned value?
~BB
Posts: 4893 | From: Burbank IL USA | Registered: Feb 2004
| IP: Logged |
Topic Closed
UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!
Printer-friendly view of this topic
