quote:Originally posted by compound cash: wait, I'm waiting for cmkx to have another spurt and then sell it, is that waht yall are waitin on?
Depends on what causes the spurt. I have some sells set if it's a good one.But I'll hold on to 1/2 mine very long term no matter what since 1/2 mine(basicly) are free anyway from the last spurt...
quote:Originally posted by Upside: We'll probably be the first team to race an AMC Pacer though. But, we've already got the advertising down....GOT USPD?
quote:Originally posted by dwman: OOOPS... Sent myself to the books. I guess in the context of your post, affinity with will work fine Wallace. You smart rascal.
I must admit, I did ponder that one for a while and left it with "with". Thanks for the oversight! LOL
Will,
You had better be quiet or I will arrange to burn the world's supply of pallets! LOL
Man, am I glad I didn't misspell "pallets" to "palets" (a small, hard or temporary bed often on the floor). That would have really given you the perfect opportunity!
[This message has been edited by Wallace#1 (edited January 02, 2005).]
posted
not a suprise that cmkx hasn't said anything. to qualify for the new SHO rules you need potential. cmkx may have good claims, the claims may one day produce great results but the o/s kills the potential. look at qbid, a few yrs ago they were to go on air, the pps went to $7 with an o/s of hundreds of millions. today they are on air but the o/s is 7.5 billion with another 6 billion restricted & the pps is .005. qbids potential is happening but the o/s is holding the pps down. cmkx has yet to show any results of any kind & the o/s is hundreds of billions, more then or at least close to equal to the entire Fortune 500's o/s. reporting so that cmkx can take advantage of the new rules & remove any naked short if there is one is a waste of time & money because the o/s kills the potential value.
IP: Logged |
Well, unless one is convinced that the company is about to go belly-up, it seems to me that it is sensible to pick up shares at .0001 since it cannot go lower (unless of course it does go belly-up). If it goes to .0006, my 23 million shares are worth 13800 and my cost is 4600 for the 23 mil. What's wrong that? Do you not think the pps will see .0006?
quote:Originally posted by dwman: I'm just curious doctoall. Are you just posting here or do you own shares of cmkx?
Yes I still own shares, I have 11.5 mil at 0.0001. I bought them way back before the run up to 0.0010. However, I have very little faith in this company and am not holding any hope of making any money with this stock. As some of the folks in this chat will remember I use to be big on this stock, but as I said I have lost all faith and now am being more reserve with this position. Show me the goods and show me pps that will rise and that will convince me. Until then I will hold the shares that I have but will not advise others to buy as I have done in the past. Good Luck with your holdings.
------------------ "If We Agree To Disagree, Then We Can Remain friends"
posted
Thanks doc. I thought I remembered you being more positive. I think even the more longsuffering of us get very tired of seeing no movement but seeing it on the very bottom gives me hope. I remember St. George ran about 7500 percent if I am not mistaken and it had nothing but a small connection with CMKM Diamonds. Cmkx closed at .0002 so that same percentage run would put it at .015. That would be 345,000 dollars for me. I really believe it can do at least that. Good luck in holding. I don't think you will be sorry. JMO
IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by ed19363: Ummmm...beg pardon, but advertising as a cost of business IS a tax deduction AS a cost of business. Better check that one with a good accountant, cause my business takes the deduction every year. Ed
Thanks Ed. Saved me the trouble of typing that. It is a write-off in as much as there are no taxes paid on the amount spent on advertising. So, you'll save whatever your bracket may be. We look at it as having spent only 1/2 on whatever we spent that year on advertising, due to being in a VERY HIGH bracket. Not bad for what we gain. Better than paying Uncle Sam I'll tell ya.
quote:Originally posted by highwaychild: I don't know,why I asked.Guess it's another one for D. Glenn man.But Lanebro had stated that he was/has been involved in the NHRA for quite some time.
Besides,back to the old big question,Why a NHRA team? Other than advertising,what does that have to do with the cost of (a diamond mining company) business?
Once again, may I repeat, UC loves his drag racing! CMKM is just a way for him to have earned enough to do so; someone elses money. We figure at this point, he's into sponsorships for 2005 = $2.5M or more.
Now, this does not include all the incidental costs. All those great handout packs, hospitality, hot dawgs, beer, hotels, airfare, etc.(multiply that by 23/ the number of events) The 2.5M he hands straight to the car owners. The rest is his additional burden. And he does do a topnotch job. They spare no expense from what I see out there.
posted
That's true as long as it passes the litmus test for advertising, promoting greater sales of your product or drawing in new customers. My "advertising" does not pass that test, I have to have informational catalogs printed and distributed mainly to existing customers as well as some new ones.
In CMKX's case granted they are advertising if you go strictly by definition but what exactly are they advertising? Shares of stock? I have a hard time believing that a massive write off like you're proposing would fly in light of the fact that there is no product and the only new "customers" their ads would generate would be new investors.
posted
Well boised... perhaps you should bail. I really doubt you own any cmkx though. Get another job. You are not good as a basher.
"Go down the bottom above Rendall's signature and read what you see in green print."
Explanation of Responses: 1. The Common Stock was transferred as payment of a fee to a marketing consultant under contract for the benefit of the Issuer. No monetary value was attributed to the stock under the terms of the consulting agreement. 2. The Amounts of Securities Beneficially Owned listed in the Reports on Form 4 filed on 4/29/04 and 10/22/04 by the Reporting Person are overstated by 50,000 shares due to the failure to timely file the transaction reported herein.
quote:Originally posted by Upside: That's true as long as it passes the litmus test for advertising, promoting greater sales of your product or drawing in new customers. My "advertising" does not pass that test, I have to have informational catalogs printed and distributed mainly to existing customers as well as some new ones.
In CMKX's case granted they are advertising if you go strictly by definition but what exactly are they advertising? Shares of stock? I have a hard time believing that a massive write off like you're proposing would fly in light of the fact that there is no product and the only new "customers" their ads would generate would be new investors.
Do you realize you just summed it all up in a nutshell? No product...just investors.
When I saw the ticker tape paint job on the first Arend car; that's all I needed to see.
Also, the guv isn't as picky as you may think. It IS advertising. Dare them to prove it's not worthwhile. It increased gross revenue! That's pretty sufficient I'd say.
quote:Also, the guv isn't as picky as you may think. It IS advertising. Dare them to prove it's not worthwhile. It increased gross revenue! That's pretty sufficient I'd say.
Now that's funny. When you look at it that way I guess I'd have to agree with you. What's the purpose of any advertising? Increase the bottom line. They certainly did that. Got CMKX?
posted
Kind of states the obvious. People aren't investing in them because they are selling diamonds.I think people are investing because they are looking to find diamonds to sell.After all,it does take money to make money.
example...From their website DIAMONDS IN SASKATCHEWAN
-One of the largest known kimberlite clusters in the world.
-130 of the 2000 kimberlite pipes known worldwide are macro-diamond bearing. 23 of these are located in the Fort a la Corne district of Saskatchewan.
-80% of Saskatchewans' kimberlite pipes are diamondiferous.
-50% contain diamonds over one millimeter in size.
-A high percentage of diamonds recovered are clear, inclusion-free and exhibit good crystal form.
-Pipes said to have erupted under inland sea and therefore have not been exposed to weathering or glaciation.
-Pipes lie within 300 feet of surface.
-Area accessible by paved all-weather road, with water and power readily available.
-Studies indicate cash operating costs of $10.50 per tonne, including overburden removal.
-Saskatchewan government encourages mining in the province.
[This message has been edited by highwaychild (edited January 03, 2005).]
quote:Originally posted by highwaychild: Kind of states the obvious. People aren't investing in them because they are selling diamonds.I think people are investing because they are looking to find diamonds to sell.After all,it does take money to make money.
Alright, good point, but why CMK? It's lottery ticket mentality.
If you believe they are so close to mega finds, why not buy adjacent Shore Gold? DeBeers? Why'd we pick these guys? Get rich quick, right? They are working our utmost, deepest desire to become filthy rich.
A great Cinderella story unfolds... Millions of happy customers.
I'm tellin' ya, if nothing else, UC et al, are brilliant.
But, to make matters a bit disturbing, they have attracted the attention of the strongest growing economy in America: blue collar. And guess what? These fine folks go to dragraces in the hundreds of thousands! NHRA is working that as well; perhaps UC hit it on the head first! That's pretty damn hysterical! (inside joke)
That, my friends, will be CMKX cashcow for a long time!
quote:Originally posted by Upside: That's true as long as it passes the litmus test for advertising, promoting greater sales of your product or drawing in new customers. My "advertising" does not pass that test, I have to have informational catalogs printed and distributed mainly to existing customers as well as some new ones.
In re-reading this, Upside, you may do well by getting additional advice from a financial planner.
I don't know what state you incorporated in, but I would tend to think, increased rev or not, you're entitled to an non-taxable advertising benefit.
Perhaps you also need a new marketer. LOL. Just kidding.
quote:Originally posted by lanebro: Alright, good point, but why CMKX? It's lottery ticket mentality.
If you believe they are so close to mega finds, why not buy adjacent Shore Gold? DeBeers? Why'd we pick these guys? Get rich quick, right? They are working our utmost, deepest desire to become filthy rich.
DeBeers is private.Shore Gold did find a monster diamond a while back.But it was most all the CMKX JV's that were going thruogh the roof in Oct. I do own NSDM, there claims are close to Saskatchewan.
quote:Originally posted by highwaychild: DeBeers is private.Shore Gold did find a monster diamond a while back.But it was most all the CMKX JV's that were going thruogh the roof in Oct. I do own NSDM, there claims are close to Saskatchewan.
I had a feeling Debeers was private. You must catch my drift, though.
I don't know you well enough to speak particulars, but I, personally, just FEEL this SO strongly; UC hit on something BIG here in the NHRA.
His sense of things (to be) huge is enough for me to bow backwards. Diamonds or not.
UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!
Printer-friendly view of this topic
