DD Support Board and Research Team

[nodummy]

SHAR - I saw they announced that the affiliate that may have illegally sold shares into the market had agreed to buy back all those shares.

Here is a post about the alleged illegal sales of shares into the market

http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=64338959

The Company believes that the Affiliate may have sold millions of shares of the Company’s stock into the market in violation of federal securities laws. The Affiliate may have made several unregistered distributions of millions of shares of the Company’s common stock through various entities each of which were under his control at the time. The Company’s investigation seeks to remedy the Affiliates illegal actions by forcing the Affiliate to buy back the shares that he sold into the market.

Demand is hereby made to Affiliate to cease and desist from selling any more of the Shares and buy back all the stock that was sold into the market and then return all of the Shares to the Company’s treasury.

Here is today's PR confirming the buy back:

http://www.marketwire.com/press-release/cooper-stock-buy-back-confirmed-and-forward-split-update-pinksheets-shar-1529570.htm

Affiliate has agreed to buy back stock that the Affiliate may have sold in violation of the Federal Securities Laws. The Company reached an agreement with the Affiliate over the weekend following its three-day investigation of the matter.


We don't get an exact number of shares. We also don't get any definitive statement that the shares were sold illegally. SHAR continues to say the shares MAY have been sold illegally even in today's press release. Also missing from today's press release is any statement saying that the shares will be returned to the company treasury like the material event filing had stated.

I would personally feel much more confident if there was more disclosure about what happened. I'd like to know who sold shares illegally and if they will still be involved with the company moving forward. I'd like confirmation that the shares will be returned to the company treasury and not just end up being sold back into the market again.



-----


They also stated that they are moving forward with the previously announced 2:1 forward split


-----


So what kind of company is SHAR?

Cooper Holdings Inc engages in the wholesale and retail sale of a diverse line of outdoor hunting and camping products.

How have sales been going?

Revenues for the last quarter (January 1, 2011 - March 31, 2011) was a dismal $300.

Luckily operating expenses were low.

The company CEO does have a patent in his name:

http://www.google.com.au/patents/about/7559334_Blind.html?id=8xjIAAAAEBAJ

Which he values at $83,335

The company has some debt issues though:

$163,974 in debt Notes
$409,500 in salaries owed

During the 3 months from January 1, 2011 - March 31, 2011 26,466,628 shares were issued. Those shares went to payoff $53,933 worth of debt at the super discount rate of $.002/share.

On January 4, 2011, the Company issued 26,466,628 shares of common stock at $.002 for cash aggregating $53,933 for payment of debt

On January 4, 2011 the stock was trading at $.024/share. That is quite the discount at $.002/share. So who go those 26,466,628 shares at that super discounted rate? The filings do not disclose that information.

What we do know is that $163,947 worth of debt Notes still remain. Are the rest of the debts owed going to be converted at the same super discounted rate of $.002/share? If so it would take 81,973,500 more shares to eliminate those debts.

The company address, 540 Bill Lamb Lane, is a very small home owned by the CEO, Dan Cooper

http://www.assessment.state.tn.us/ParcelDetail3.asp?C=040


------


Also of note on December 31, 2010 the CEO, Dan Cooper, had 15,150,500 shares. On March 31, 2011 the CEO, Dan Cooper, had 13,150,500 shares. According to the attorney letter filed by Christopher Davies all of Dan Cooper's 15,150,500 shares he owned on December 31, 2010 were restricted. Almost makes you wonder if Dan Cooper was the affiliate that may have illegally sold shares into the market and has now agreed to buy those shares back. Could this be why the affiliate remains unnamed? It certainly is an intriguing possibility.

http://www.otcmarkets.com/otciq/ajax/showFinancialReportById.pdf?id=51630



http://www.otcmarkets.com/otciq/ajax/showFinancialReportById.pdf?id=53621