posted
Spoke to the receptionist who forwarded me on to someone in the legal department. Sounded like a secretary, not an attorney. So I didn't note the name, simply wrote down the information.
IP: Logged |
posted
legaleagle wrote: "Some folks see devastation at these prices, some see opportunity. Funny world isn't it?" ***************************************
And CMKX could file for BK tomorrow just as easily. That just might be another easy way out. With their earnings picture such a move is not out of the question. Also just might provide the 3 stooges some personal protection.
I'll bet there are many of the shareholders of CMKX that do not find it too funny right now.
The facts surrounding CMKX were far less than acceptable prior to the Commission taking action. Now, they are worse...much worse.
quote:Originally posted by legaleagle: Two options: BUY SELL
No kidding? LOL
BUY is no option unless someone is having fun throwing their money down a waste disposal.
As far as SELL is concerned, haven't you been reading what some who are trying to sell are experiencing now? Sell at .0001? A pitance compared to what they probably paid. So, the third option is HOLD/HOPE.
[This message has been edited by Wallace#1 (edited November 11, 2004).]
quote:Originally posted by legaleagle: Always room for the "undecided" vote as well.
HOLD is a valid decision under certain circumstances and not necessarily indicative of "indecision". In the case of CMKX as it now appears, HOLD is about the only decision that makes any sense at all. Only a fool would BUY. No level to SELL. Might as well hold and hope for the best. Hell, it's at .0001 right now. Cannot lose much more if they go BK. With a far off remote possibility that it might go back up a bit above .0002+, HOLD "IS" the only logical decision.
posted
i've had a sell in since monday am at .0002 still waiting. might have been able to sell at .0001 for a 75% loss but am holding for a 50% loss. the cmkx we know & love will be gone, too many problems. our only hope is everything gets transfered into CIM and then some day it has some value. give the claims & gold mine to CIM with a somewhat resonable o/s if you can call 40 billion reasonable and trash cmkx
IP: Logged |
posted
USCA CEO Rendall Williams is probably happy to see the shares trading again. He has 88,000 shares left to unload. Between June 04 and Sept 21 04 he has unloaded most of his holdings for a staggering $485,000. Not bad for the CEO of a company with no revenues and only 1300 and change in cash.Which leaves the other question " who are the suckers buying up his shares?" LOL
IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by BCmouser: USCA CEO Rendall Williams is probably happy to see the shares trading again. He has 88,000 shares left to unload. Between June 04 and Sept 21 04 he has unloaded most of his holdings for a staggering $485,000. Not bad for the CEO of a company with no revenues and only 1300 and change in cash.Which leaves the other question " who are the suckers buying up his shares?" LOL
Good to see you again, BC.
It appears, as you said a long time ago, that both UCAD/USCA and CMKX are both a losing deal.
GLTY
[This message has been edited by Wallace#1 (edited November 11, 2004).]
quote:Originally posted by BCmouser: USCA CEO Rendall Williams is probably happy to see the shares trading again. He has 88,000 shares left to unload. Between June 04 and Sept 21 04 he has unloaded most of his holdings for a staggering $485,000. Not bad for the CEO of a company with no revenues and only 1300 and change in cash.Which leaves the other question " who are the suckers buying up his shares?" LOL
I guess I am one of those "suckers". $485,000 is not a lot for ownership of Yellow River, Juina Mining, Nevada Magnetics, and the COD Mine; not to mention partnerships with the El Capitan Mine and Casavant Mining.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
U.S. Canadian Minerals (USCA) is a multi-dimensional, mineral-based corporation headquartered in Las Vegas, Nevada. On its own and through Joint Ventures, USCA is looking to expand and develop mining properties throughout the world. USCA has already begun work on several projects, all of which are in various stages of development.
USCA has acquired a 20% revenue interest in 500,000 acres of Kimberlitic-likely land in Saskatchewan, Canada and an option to purchase a 25% interest in 27 claims, comprised of approximately 22,447 acres located near Smeaton, Saskatchewan, Canada . Initial drilling on the Smeaton property indicates the presence of Kimberlitic rock. Previous drilling by earlier operators had the same indications.
In addition, USCA has acquired a controlling interest in Juina Mining Corporation. Juina has a 49% interest in a joint venture partnership with DIAGEM International Resource Corp. (DGM) in the Brazilian company Juina Mining Mineracao, Ltd. (JMML) holds an 86% working interest in the mining and mineral rights to approximately 1000 hectares (2,471 acres) of diamond bearing land in the District of Juina, Mato Grosso, Brazil. Juina has recently signed an agreement, subject to due diligence, to acquire Yellow River Mining, S.A. which operates the Yellow River Gold Mine in southwest Ecuador.
USCA has also acquired 100% of Nevada Magnetic Material, Inc. Nevada Magnetic Material, Inc. is focused on the production of Nickel Sulfide Anode Bars. The Anode Bars contain approximately 76.3% nickel, 1.4% silver, 1.7% gold and 20.6% residual materials according the Company's most current Assay Report.
In May 2004, USCA acquired 80% of the COD Mine just outside of Kingman AZ. El Capitan Precious Metals, Inc. will operate the property and begin to process the trailings and dumps. The revenue from such operations will be split 50/50 among the parties.
USCA has signed an agreement with Sonic Technologies International (STI) for joint research and development. STI is based in Las Vegas, Nevada. STI possesses specialized technology for separating various minerals.
posted
It's funny how the first thing this morning the fact that USCA resumed trading was acredited to RG legal prowess, then only to find out later the resumption was routine and customary. They always inflate and glorify any little thing attached to this crap.
IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by will: It's funny how the first thing this morning the fact that USCA resumed trading was acredited to RG legal prowess, then only to find out later the resumption was routine and customary. They always inflate and glorify any little thing attached to this crap.
It's only "routine and customary" if no enforcement action is taken. The lack of enforcement action is owing to Roger Glenn's "prowess".
[This message has been edited by legaleagle (edited November 11, 2004).]
[This message has been edited by legaleagle (edited November 11, 2004).]
posted
Do we know there won't be any enforcement action yet?
quote:Originally posted by legaleagle: It's only "routine and customary" if no enforcement action is taken. The lack of enforcement action is owing to Roger Glenn's "prowess".
[This message has been edited by legaleagle (edited November 11, 2004).]
[This message has been edited by legaleagle (edited November 11, 2004).]
posted
No, we don't know that. A 10 day suspension is just that, a suspension that lasts 10 days. The investigation could still be ongoing which could result in any number of actions. We won't know until the SEC makes a public statement. I would think that if they were free and clear of all charges we would have known that by now.
IP: Logged |
posted
Legaleagle I fnd it amazing that you can put a positive spin on the CEO selling out. Think for a minute- this was still Barrington Foods in Jan 04 , they were penniless owed, millions of dollars and had absolutely nothing going on. Suddenly they become mining experts and dole out millions of dollars for JV in companies all over North and South America. Not one of these companies files SEC reports. So we know the millions of dollars they are spending is not coming from the CEO -he is unloading- where is all this cash coming from. I think perhaps this is one of the questions the SEC is putting to USCA . Their Q report is due any day now -it should be a very interesting read.
IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by BCmouser: Legaleagle I fnd it amazing that you can put a positive spin on the CEO selling out. Think for a minute- this was still Barrington Foods in Jan 04 , they were penniless owed, millions of dollars and had absolutely nothing going on. Suddenly they become mining experts and dole out millions of dollars for JV in companies all over North and South America. Not one of these companies files SEC reports. So we know the millions of dollars they are spending is not coming from the CEO -he is unloading- where is all this cash coming from. I think perhaps this is one of the questions the SEC is putting to USCA . Their Q report is due any day now -it should be a very interesting read.
3Q due out Monday from what I have heard today. Guess we'll just have to wait and see.
[This message has been edited by legaleagle (edited November 12, 2004).]
[This message has been edited by legaleagle (edited November 12, 2004).]
posted
Pardon my interuption, as I am a lurker.... I don't think Legal Eagle is trying to put a positive spin so much as offer another frame of thought. There is two sides to every arguement. The dust has not settled yet and untill it does both frames of thought have room for arguement....
quote:Originally posted by BCmouser: Legaleagle I fnd it amazing that you can put a positive spin on the CEO selling out. Think for a minute- this was still Barrington Foods in Jan 04 , they were penniless owed, millions of dollars and had absolutely nothing going on. Suddenly they become mining experts and dole out millions of dollars for JV in companies all over North and South America. Not one of these companies files SEC reports. So we know the millions of dollars they are spending is not coming from the CEO -he is unloading- where is all this cash coming from. I think perhaps this is one of the questions the SEC is putting to USCA . Their Q report is due any day now -it should be a very interesting read.
------------------ If heaven had a height .... You would be that tall.
quote:Originally posted by Upside: No, we don't know that. A 10 day suspension is just that, a suspension that lasts 10 days. The investigation could still be ongoing which could result in any number of actions. We won't know until the SEC makes a public statement. I would think that if they were free and clear of all charges we would have known that by now.
Up, thanks again for the sec link you gave me yesterday. I think I read that no public statement will be made by sec if no problems are found. If problems are found then they will issue some sort of action against them. If all is well, I would not expect a public statement. Please correct me if I misinterpreted the info found on that link. BTW, good morning to you. Don
posted
Morning Don, I think you're right, if they're cleared the SEC won't say anything but I would think that if they had been pronounced clean, USCA and all would be screaming it from the high heavens by now. My guess is that if and when they're cleared, we'll know about it within 60 seconds tops.
IP: Logged |
posted
Well, you see UpMan you are right and you are wrong. This situation has been argued from both sides by the same poster:
legaleagle Member posted November 10, 2004 22:00 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- "I fully understand an investigation is not guilt, but I also understand it isn't a good thing."
It can be a very good thing to go through an analytical review by the SEC, and come out the other side without an enforcement action. It amounts to getting the blessing of the SEC,if you are investigated and cleared.
While it may cause a short term deflation of the price per share, the long term effect will be a new confindence by shareholders. I would dare to say that being cleared by the SEC is what this stock needs.
legaleagle Member posted November 11, 2004 11:37 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- The SEC does not look favorably on a company issuing a PR concerning hearings under suspension. Regardless of what the results were. There may still be ongoing investigations, requirements to produce additional documents, incomplete audits, etc. before the conclusion.
Suspension of trading is for 10 days. Reopening of trading does not mean that an investigation is not still ongoing.
If USCA was cleared it would be unwise to announce such. If the investigation is ongoing it would be unwise to comment on anything.
If USCA issued a simple fluff statement to shareholders that everything was going well, many would complain about the lack of details. If they issue a PR stating that they were cleared, the SEC would come down on them. If they issued a PR stating that the investigation was ongoing, it would be misconstrued as some element of guilt since they weren't immediately cleared.
PRing at this point is a Catch 22. Wrong if you do, wrong if you don't.
Once again, shareholders have to be patient and await the results. There just isn't any other choice."
So again, conveniently this is left wide open, and can take a favorable spin either way. Thats how it's done. Surely these are open and honest opinions, might even be factual, but you see how convenient it is. One could choose either post to build his next positive spin. Be great if they were cleared, but the SEC doesn't say anything, and they'll get spanked if they do. So, it could go on forever without us knowing the truth.
quote:Originally posted by Upside: Morning Don, I think you're right, if they're cleared the SEC won't say anything but I would think that if they had been pronounced clean, USCA and all would be screaming it from the high heavens by now. My guess is that if and when they're cleared, we'll know about it within 60 seconds tops.
posted
I don't understand why the SEC would frown on a company issuing a p/r once the investigation was complete and the company was cleared. That doesn't make sense. During an investigation I can understand but once closed and cleared I would think they'd give it their blessing.
IP: Logged |
posted
Well, that part is difficult to sort out. See it says "regardless what the results are", and also "before the conclusion". It's a word game, you're safe, and can be right either way. That's how lies are avoided but half truths published. You walk on bohtsides of the street at the same time. Could be it was meant to say something else, and it wasn't written clear. Only the author would know his intent. Surely he wouldn't capitalize on being open ended after the fact.
"The SEC does not look favorably on a company issuing a PR concerning hearings under suspension. Regardless of what the results were. There may still be ongoing investigations, requirements to produce additional documents, incomplete audits, etc. before the conclusion."
quote:Originally posted by Upside: I don't understand why the SEC would frown on a company issuing a p/r once the investigation was complete and the company was cleared. That doesn't make sense. During an investigation I can understand but once closed and cleared I would think they'd give it their blessing.
There is the possibility that I am reading it wrong. Maybe you can interpret better than I can. ???
[This message has been edited by will (edited November 12, 2004).]
[This message has been edited by will (edited November 12, 2004).]
quote:Originally posted by will: Well, that part is difficult to sort out. See it says "regardless what the results are", and also "before the conclusion". It's a word game, you're safe, and can be right either way. That's how lies are avoided but half truths published. You walk on bohtsides of the street at the same time. Could be it was meant to say something else, and it wasn't written clear. Only the author would know his intent. Surely he wouldn't capitalize on being open ended after the fact.
"The SEC does not look favorably on a company issuing a PR concerning hearings under suspension. Regardless of what the results were. There may still be ongoing investigations, requirements to produce additional documents, incomplete audits, etc. before the conclusion."
There is the possibility that I am reading it wrong. Maybe you can interpret better than I can. ???
[This message has been edited by will (edited November 12, 2004).]
[This message has been edited by will (edited November 12, 2004).]
My intent was to show all possibilities of what could occur. What else can be done until the case is concluded and published? What are your intentions in alleging that I am lying through "half truths"? Please point them out.
[This message has been edited by legaleagle (edited November 12, 2004).]
posted
Be clear then. Will/can the company publish the outcome of the investigation without fear of retaliation from SEC or not? Seems you say it would be good if they were cleared, but the SEC would frown on them publishing the results of the investigation if favorable. Leaving investors in the dark regarding the outcome. Just asking which is it?
IP: Logged |
posted
CMKX/USCA Management = Ostrich Theory, bury your head in the sand and hope that the problems go away. Say nothing and maybe just maybe the problems will be gone when you uncover your head. NOT!!!!
------------------ "If We Agree To Disagree, Then We Can Remain friends"
posted
Found on another board. Forgive if already posted but I don't see it here.
OT: FYI Zoomingstocks « Thread started on: Today at 10:53am »
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------- an email i received
-------------------------------------
Zoomingstocks.com Announces Changes in partnerships... San Diego, CA Nov 12, 2004 Andrew Hill resigns as partner at Zoomingstocks.com
Martha "Marty" Estes joins Zoomingstocks.com as partner
Changes in management Zoomingstocks.com is sad to announce the departure of one of its principle partners, Mr. Andrew Hill. Mr. Hill has been instrumental in launching Zoomingstocks.com and has resigned his position. Andrew "Andy" Hill also known as "Oaks" or "Okanagan" has accepted a new Investor Relations position with another company and will no longer represent Zoomingstocks.com in any capacity. Mr. Hill would like to thank everyone who supported Zoomingstocks.com in its initial weeks and wishes everyone much luck with his or her investments
Succeeding Mr. Hill in his position as a principle partner at Zoomingstocks.com is Mrs. Martha "Marty" Estes. Mrs. Estes comes to Zoomingstocks.com with experience in the securities fields and excels in marketing, event planning, customer service and business development. Her skills will contribute significantly in the daily operations of this company. Welcome aboard Marty!
From Zoomingstocks.com, we wish Mr. Hill success in his new job and God speed. Jose Davila Marty Estes
About Zoomingstocks.com
ZoomingStocks.com is the premier OTCBB Stock Analysis company. It's goal, to provide you with rapid and timely information is well suited to your investment needs. Zoom your way to wealth!
UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!
Printer-friendly view of this topic
