News 
Market Data 
Discover
Register for free to join our community of investors and share your ideas. You will also get access to streaming quotes, interactive charts, trades, portfolio, live options flow and more tools.
yep a sneeze away from the 9's
slap it baby. at least no dilution and no notes
something of something might be happening more hits on the ask sitter at .0007..chomp chomp
damn! Mashallah - let's rip baby!
Someone is chewing on the 7’s
Gonna be a good runner.
Have fun peeps off to see Creed 🚀
Ask is so thin. wish I was more liquid to add.
Any sort of good news or rumors and this baby rockets. $CIVX
Looks like at least CIVX has a pulse
Took the necessary steps to get Pink Current. Paid the filing fees and now I'm supposed to believe some loser poster who never made a successful trade in his life that this is a bad investment. ROFL!
All the assets are now coming now that this is fully disclosed as Alt Reporting 100% compliant hahaha 🚀
Cavan has not verfiably denied that the company consultant Christopher Martinez - the indicted and FINRA banned ex-broker and financial advisor and consultant is not the consultant for the company.
This scammer has the same name, was a broker before getting banned by FINRA and was/is also a financial advisor and consultant.
Christopher Martinez who is CIVX's "consultant," unless verifiably proven that he's not the same individual is a shyster.
https://www.otcmarkets.com/stock/CIVX/profile
https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&opi=89978449&url=https://files.brokercheck.finra.org/individual/individual_4072355.pdf&ved=2ahUKEwjA-9CQot6GAxVj4MkDHW3DDx0QFnoECB8QAQ&usg=AOvVaw0PGAqtt2DEJXJ5Q_H6hCAm
Why is there no direct link to an actual verifiable post from Cavan about Christopher Martinez, the company consultant not being that indicted, FINRA banned consultant?
Especially with all the lies being spread by pumpers on this board.
Just a denial from a screenshot from a personal email that can be easily altered doesn't cut it.
He's been the CEO/Owner of multiple companies that he took to the OTCQB and has advised others that have gone as far as the NASDAQ.
HOW FINRA RULE 6490 lMPACTS REVERSE MERGERS
https://www.hg.org/legal-articles/how-finra-rule-6490-lmpacts-reverse-mergers-30567
FINRA Rule 6490, has evolved since it was enacted over two years ago. For some time, FINRA has required that issuers provide expansive disclosures and supporting documentation not only for the corporate change subject to the notice but for the company’s entire corporate history from inception.
These disclosures are required of both SEC reporting and non-reporting issuers if they undertake corporate actions including reverse mergers. Compliance with Rule 6490's requirements is a minor task for companies going public by filing a registration statement with the SEC. Companies filing registration statements rarely have difficulties obtaining DTC eligibility unlike reverse merger issuers.
The public filings of companies who register with the SEC contain most of the supporting documentation required by Rule 6490.
It is no surprise that compliance with the requirements of Rule 6490 is less burdensome for companies going public using a registration statement because these companies have fewer corporate changes in their company history than companies engaging in reverse mergers. This is especially true for reverse merger issuers who undergo multiple changes of control and periods of inactivity.
The Problem with Reverse Mergers & Disclosure under Rule 6490
For companies that engage in reverse mergers as part of their going public transaction, compliance with Rule 6490's requirements can be impossible particularly when custodianship or receivership actions have been used by shell brokers to create public shells after years of inactivity. These companies may have multiple corporate actions related to prior changes of control and often have sketchy corporate histories. Some have even been hijacked through custodianship or receivership actions. In these circumstances, documents may be unavailable or if provided to FINRA, it could potentially result in FINRA referring the matter to the SEC’s Division of Enforcement.
These companies are almost always plagued with incomplete or fraudulent corporate records which make it extremely difficult for the post-reverse merger company to comply with FINRA Rule 6490. As a result, these companies may never get FINRA approval of the contemplated corporate action.
Rule 6490 Disclosures
Issuers must provide a cover letter disclosing the full corporate history for the issuer itemizing all material facts including every corporate change that has occurred from inception to present day.
Triggers for Review under FINRA RULE 6490
A FINRA review will be triggered if any of the five factors set forth in Rule 6490 are thought to be present:
• FINRA believes the forms are incomplete, inaccurate or filed without the appropriate corporate authority;
• The issuer is not current in its reporting obligations with the Securities and Exchange Commission;
• Persons involved in or related to the corporate action are the subject of pending or settled regulatory action or are under investigation by a regulatory body or are the subject of a pending criminal action related to fraud or securities law violations;
• Persons related to the corporate action are likely involved in fraudulent activities involving securities or may pose a threat to investors;
• There is significant uncertainty in the settlement and clearance process for the issuer’s securities.
Any company contemplating going public using a reverse merger must consider the potential impact Rule 6490 could have on its future corporate actions. Rule 6490 provides one more compelling reason why private companies seeking to go public should do so using a registration statement instead of a reverse merger.
Conducting effective due diligence on the shell company is essential, as merging with a “dirty” shell (i.e., a shell whose management failed to follow proper SEC reporting procedures) could prove fatal for the private company.[13] In searching for “clean” shells, private companies should consider the shell’s number of stockholders, reporting record, and how and where it is listed.[14]
CIVX no convertible debt, fully Pink Current compliant with Alternate Reporting Standard.
Both public and private companies can register a class of securities on Form 10. Form 10 is also used by shell purveyors to create inventory for reverse merger transactions that take a company from private to public company status. These shells are subject to SEC reporting requirements.
Q. If a non-reporting company was a shell company twenty years ago, is it required to file a Form 10 to cure its shell status for purposes of its shareholders having the ability to rely upon Rule 144’s safe harbor?
A. Yes, if a non-reporting entity was a shell company during any time in its history, it must either file a Form 10 registration statement or a registration statement on Form S-1 in order for its shareholders to rely upon Rule 144.
The proof is on here
I did not attack "a trader just because he lost money on the same tickers."
You don't know what you're talking about.
He sold GVS* at a low and bought EVL* which is at 0.00001 now so yeah that’s correct
Both public and private companies can register a class of securities on Form 10. Form 10 is also used by shell purveyors to create inventory for reverse merger transactions that take a company from private to public company status. These shells are subject to SEC reporting requirements.
Q. If a non-reporting company was a shell company twenty years ago, is it required to file a Form 10 to cure its shell status for purposes of its shareholders having the ability to rely upon Rule 144’s safe harbor?
A. Yes, if a non-reporting entity was a shell company during any time in its history, it must either file a Form 10 registration statement or a registration statement on Form S-1 in order for its shareholders to rely upon Rule 144.
The opposing side is basing things off nonsense and rent-a-laywers' opinions on random websites.
Yes agree! It's the safest bet on the entire OTC Market. Traders will wake up eventually and see this soon! +1 Member Mark for your common sense type posts. The opposing side is basing things off nonsense and rent-a-laywers' opinions on random websites. It's quite entertaining, but sad. Fully OTCM compliant here. Quoted on all platforms through OTCLink. On to the goodies next 🚀
Soon we will all be on that beach like in your profile picture. Good things happening here. All we need to do is accumulate and hold! $CIVX
fully Pink Current compliant with Alternate Reporting Standard. Wow, good things are about to happen here. Acquisitions through OTC Disclosures and social media 🚀
Reports to OTCM not SEC. Has nothing to do with Reporting to SEC. CIVX chose to go Alternate Reporting. Don't listen to the idiot that can't comprehend these rules!
Both public and private companies can register a class of securities on Form 10. Form 10 is also used by shell purveyors to create inventory for reverse merger transactions that take a company from private to public company status. These shells are subject to SEC reporting requirements.
Q. If a non-reporting company was a shell company twenty years ago, is it required to file a Form 10 to cure its shell status for purposes of its shareholders having the ability to rely upon Rule 144’s safe harbor?
A. Yes, if a non-reporting entity was a shell company during any time in its history, it must either file a Form 10 registration statement or a registration statement on Form S-1 in order for its shareholders to rely upon Rule 144.
CIVX no convertible debt, fully Pink Current compliant with Alternate Reporting Standard. Wow, good things are about to happen here. Acquisitions through OTC Disclosures and social media 🚀
Reports to OTCM not SEC. Has nothing to do with Reporting to SEC. CIVX chose to go Alternate Reporting. Don't listen to the idiot that can't comprehend these rules!
Companies with a shell history like CIVX must register with the SEC
https://www.securitieslawyer101.com/2020/form-10-registration-statement/#:~:text=Both%20public%20and%20private%20companies,subject%20to%20SEC%20reporting%20requirements.
Both public and private companies can register a class of securities on Form 10. Form 10 is also used by shell purveyors to create inventory for reverse merger transactions that take a company from private to public company status. These shells are subject to SEC reporting requirements.
Q. If a non-reporting company was a shell company twenty years ago, is it required to file a Form 10 to cure its shell status for purposes of its shareholders having the ability to rely upon Rule 144’s safe harbor?
A. Yes, if a non-reporting entity was a shell company during any time in its history, it must either file a Form 10 registration statement or a registration statement on Form S-1 in order for its shareholders to rely upon Rule 144.
|
Followers
|
206
|
Posters
|
|
|
Posts (Today)
|
0
|
Posts (Total)
|
10074
|
|
Created
|
09/07/06
|
Type
|
Free
|
| Moderators LCJR Lime Time Tomorrowneverknows | |||
AI
