Plastic2Oil Inc (PTOI)

[loanranger]

"But I do not think that the existence of a Wells submission, standing alone, would significantly alter the information available to an investor on which to base an investment decision."

Obviously it would alter the information available to the investor receiving the information. Our perception of its significance isn't the issue...the legal issue is whether the person providing it 1)realized that it was non-public information and 2)could reasonably foresee that the shareholder that they were informing would, in this case, buy shares based on it. (It's interesting, and may be telling in terms of the inadequacy of the law, that it doesn't address a decision by the shareholder to HOLD shares which they had been inclined to sell based on the information provided). Again obviously, what one "spokesperson" could reasonably foresee is as subjective as the criteria that one "investor" uses to make a decision. (I'm still smiling about this, even though I get the feeling that you actually meant it to be serious: "Perhaps, but the rule imposes an objective standard (i.e., reasonableness).")

I sense a personal concern for the parties involved......both the JBI giver and investor receiver. My purpose was not to threaten them with the long arm of the law, although I hope both the spokesperson and the shareholder will benefit from the issues raised in this exchange.
Rather it was to perhaps raise the attention level of those in control of the release of information at JBI that, in view of their vow of transparency, they release any non-public information that MAY be material in accordance with applicable law. I sense that I have done that.
From a purely practical versus legal standpoint, if a Wells Submission has been made, releasing that information one phone call at a time disadvantages those that rely on the public release of information to make their decisions. I agree that, if no one was provided that information, it wouldn't be significant. However, I also feel that if one person WAS provided that information, that act renders it significant and it should then be publicly released if only in the interest of fairness to ALL of its current and potential shareholders.



ps. "In any event, I believe the poster who sparked this concern of yours has stated that he was not, in fact, informed of a "Wells Submission." Please correct me if I am mistaken."
I'll let you be the judge of that. The thread is neither lengthy nor complicated. Please start here:
http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=66951541