posted
I am a little confused about these shares. So the first dividend was restricted UCAD shares correct? And this means that I must hold them for at least a year, then I can sell them. Or, if I hold them for two years I can trade them for unrestricted shares, is this correct?
As for the most current. This is a spinoff, so does that mean that these shares really have no value? Or what? Please help, thanks.
posted
IN AMERITRADE, divy shares described as "CMKM DIAMONDS INC" NOT "CASAVANT INTERNATIONAL MINING"
Wussup with dat ?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?
P.S: (from RB) bill19336: when I spoke to ETRADE about this very thing this morning, they stated that since CIM is not a publicly traded company , and another company actually had those initials ( CIM) they could not be used, so they issued a registation number, under the temporary heading CMKM Diamonds Inc. tender offer. Hope this helps. p2dny"
posted
glfpimp, I'm not 100% sure here but the UCAD shares will be restricted for a minimum of one year and can be restricted for longer at the companys discretion. They can also elect to lift the restriction earlier than the one year period, I think. The CIM shares you have or will be receiving shortly are worthless as of right now. CIM is not a publicly held company and until they become one, you can't do anything with those shares.
IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by TruthTeller: P.S: (from RB) bill19336: when I spoke to ETRADE about this very thing this morning, they stated that since CIM is not a publicly traded company , and another company actually had those initials ( CIM) they could not be used, so they issued a registation number, under the temporary heading CMKM Diamonds Inc. tender offer. Hope this helps. p2dny" .]
Truth be told, that was a very helpful explanation. Thanks.
posted
One person asked earlier how the bid could be .0001 and the ask at .0003, and transactions taking place at .0002.
This is a delimma. Some think it is because they, the mm's use an extra decimal we do not see, The thing about this is that would restrict all buying to mm's, a brokerage or CMKX.
It seems to me MM's are loading up at .0002 and all sales will be .0003 and above. I believe they will soon walk this up to take their profits. Don't have a clue how high they will go with it. I guess until they run out of .0002 shares.
posted
They asked this post to be circulated. I don't know how they know so take it for what it is worth.
quote: OT: THIS IS A MUST READ EVERYONE..BRILLIANT STUFF>
By: rbitulsa 19 Oct 2004, 02:07 PM EDT Msg. 102275 of 102352 Jump to msg. # The SEC is forcing a non-retail covering.
This is the last few paragraphs of my previous message, if you want to cut to the chase (the short story, so to speak)
The covering we are seeing right now is essentially a change in accounting for CMKX shares by anyone who is/was a lending member to the DTC for CMKX, who is/was reporting to have a long position of unpledged CMKX shares in their DTC trust account, and further was a lending member who was at the same time selling or brokering the sale of short shares of CMKX, and not settling those sales at the required T+3 (or ever).
The “covering” is taking place on all shares loaned out to the NSCC, by the DTC Member described above; specifically, those shares loaned out in order to cover a retail settlement failure within the DTC system, and retained on the DTC Member’s books as still being owned by the DTC Member. The SEC is requiring that these shares be re-accounted for as sales, rather than loans, and be removed from both the books of the DTC Member Lenders.
Because the share loans (which were done blind to the market) are now sales, these transactions must be accounted for in the market and through the tickers.
Simply put, say JEFF for example was responsible for both facilitating sales of CMKX which never settled, and was receiving back buy-in shares from their own purchases which went unsettled, all while reporting a long position of unpledged CMKX shares into the DTC trust – showing them as available to be borrowed.
The main effects of this covering:
1) It drastically reduces the number of naked short shares in CMKX. In the example (see 58 – 59 above), the short-seller sold 1,000 naked shares into the market (and failed on it’s settlement) but 2,000 shares ended up being legally owned (1,000 by the buyer and 1,000 by the DTC lender). With the accounting change, in this example, there is now only the short-sellers initial settlement failure which remains open, and the buyer becomes the sole owner of the 1,000 shares.
2) As DTC Member Lenders re-account their “loans to the DTC” as sales, it reduces, and likely completely eliminates, their “long positions” in CMKX, which would also significantly reduce, if not completely eliminate, the DTC’s “borrowing pool” for CMKX
When this “phase” of covering is complete, there should be one settlement failure for every fake share held in the retail market.
posted
RJR wrote re a repost: "They asked this post to be circulated. I don't know how they know so take it for what it is worth." ----------------------------------------
posted
Morning everyone! Anyone else excited today? Perhaps feeling like a little kid on Christmas Eve? Or did all of you forget what tomorrow is? Tomorrow's Sarki Day when CMKX hits .10 and becomes a fully reporting company! Make those financial plans now as the big windfall hits tomorrow! Remember, he knows things!
IP: Logged |
posted
I think you're playing just fine, UpMan. Outragious claims and people need to be held accountable, less everyone forgets sarki's outlandish claims. It's irresponsible to make such predictions, and it's silly to think you won't be called on them when they fail to materilize.
quote:Originally posted by Upside: Morning everyone! Anyone else excited today? Perhaps feeling like a little kid on Christmas Eve? Or did all of you forget what tomorrow is? Tomorrow's Sarki Day when CMKX hits .10 and becomes a fully reporting company! Make those financial plans now as the big windfall hits tomorrow! Remember, he knows things!
posted
LOL! I was thinking "it" is humorous enough. They could buy Fort Knox for $10, and the PPS would still be laying there at .0001 - .0003, because of the hillarious amount of O/S.
quote:Originally posted by JEAL: Will -
Dont disagree - just trying to add some humor to this whole adventure.....
posted
We all ( myself included _ keep talking about the o/s and the naked shorting. After this latest PR which I have to admit is one of their more detailed and professional ones, I have to really question what is going on. I dont think that this ( no pps movement ) can solely be accountable by 1. Just the o/s 2. Naked Shorting 3. Naught MM's 4. Poor PR's 5. Shareholders in the dark etc... There really has to be somthing going on, and personally IMO, dont beleive that it is just the o/s - although the math does show that it is possible this is the reason. Anyway, I am holding 5 mil at 0.0001 and am still hoping for the best - not millions, but a nice new small boat would be nice
JEAL
quote:Originally posted by will: LOL! I was thinking "it" is humorous enough. They could buy Fort Knox for $10, and the PPS would still be laying there at .0001 - .0003, because of the hillarious amount of O/S.
[This message has been edited by JEAL (edited October 20, 2004).]
posted
Does it come with daimonds, gold or uranium in it?
quote:Originally posted by Upside: originally posted by JEAL: Well, if it doesn't work out how about a 12 year old bass boat with a 30 horse merc? I'll sell you that pretty cheap!
posted
I have a sell order in at .10 for 2M shares. When it sells tomorrow morning, I'm gonna have a party (you are all invited).
quote:Originally posted by Upside: Morning everyone! Anyone else excited today? Perhaps feeling like a little kid on Christmas Eve? Or did all of you forget what tomorrow is? Tomorrow's Sarki Day when CMKX hits .10 and becomes a fully reporting company! Make those financial plans now as the big windfall hits tomorrow! Remember, he knows things!
posted
I wouldn't be taking my party clothes to the cleaners, there won't be a party if you have to sell at .10 to have it.
quote:Originally posted by ed19363: I have a sell order in at .10 for 2M shares. When it sells tomorrow morning, I'm gonna have a party (you are all invited).
posted
Please feel free to support it with link....
quote:Originally posted by rde3: UCAD and CMKX are going to merge soon. Info found online. That's the reason, everything has not been on the up and up.
quote:Originally posted by rde3: UCAD and CMKX are going to merge soon. Info found online. That's the reason, everything has not been on the up and up.
posted
lets see a company with a 30 million o/s merging with a company with a 779 billion o/s...a company with 3 producing gold mines, equipment to process the ore to at least the first separation, a mine in south america thats close to digging diamonds, about 30% of the fabled sask. diamond claims, property with equipment & buildings to do final refining of ore merging with a company with 1 producing gold mine, 20% of the same diamond claims & 1 shell company & 200 billion shares of a second shell company & 50% of a uranium claim not even tested yet...yep i can see ucad shareholders voting that merger in. it would be a no-brainer, just pass a lot of that aged opium out they found in canadain woods & it would fly
IP: Logged |
posted
Why is that acceptable to not be on the up and up? LOL! Another. "we can't expose the master plan", scenario. C'mon people, there is no justification for the lack of honesty and forthrightness.
quote:Originally posted by rde3: UCAD and CMKX are going to merge soon. Info found online. That's the reason, everything has not been on the up and up.
posted
bet it was zen or sterling or dr. d that said it. one day and not in the near term cmkx will pay off but it wont be by merging with ucad. i wouldn't be suprised if that 200 billion sggm becomes cmkx one day or even CIM with a 200 billion o/s but to go from 779 billion to 30 million??
IP: Logged |
Topic Closed
UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!
Printer-friendly view of this topic
