Keith Maydak''s Warning Signals

[Keith Maydak]

Joanna Chmielewska is an anagram for A Claim Weakens John.

[Hedgebunny]

FLMAO LOL>>>

[Rev Kilgore Mullet]

Hey Keith, when are you going to fess up to your role in ACDU? And who is ACDU's Joanna Chmielewska and Andy William...you?

[Chili Palmer]

Any new Keith Madak Warning Signals?

[Hedgebunny]

CHili, how many shares of $BEACON$ you have again?
* what's your price target?

Maybe @@ mookie knows? lol lol......... Dominion gas Leasing? MMcf's? NG Drilling Marcellus Shale?

[Hedgebunny]

Been loading $Beacon$ for months.... since May none stop.....
*** AND LOOKING FORWARD TO LOADING MORE SOON in my opinion of speculations ...... Should i post here first before i load? Should i post here before i buy, let everyone know how many shares i am loading at the market? THanks! Have a great weekend everyone!
* just my own opinions of speculations do your own research make up your own opinions of speculations......

Dominion gas Leasing, MMcf's, drilling, Marcellus Shale NG???? What's your opinion Keith, thanks!
Try and Google.... WIKIMarcellus.com and type in DOminion Gas. Does it say LEASING or LEASED? Thanks again KEITH!! just my own opinions of speculations.....

[Chili Palmer]

This is well um oh um news!

[Keith Maydak]

We are in the process of hiring Marshal Schitmann over at DIBZ as our corporate counsel.

[Keith Maydak]

We are in the process of hiring Marshal Schitmann over at DIBZ as our corporate counsel.

[Keith Maydak]

DIBZ is my new company. I look forward to getting the wheels in motion and to the mooooooooooon.

[QaB2i]

indeed

[Rev Kilgore Mullet]

Beacon Redevelopment & Hilland Trace are names associated with Keith Maydak. Why are both of these names listed as assets on the ACDU 2011 10-KA? Happy coincidence?

[Rev Kilgore Mullet]

Is Keith a part of the ACDU scam?

If not...Keith, what is your analysis of a delinquent reporting, recycled, fluffbomb spewing, broke pinkie with anonymous control owners, fictitious management, a going concern audit opinion and an IR dude who has apparently gone into hiding?

[Chili Palmer]

Any new warnings?

[Chili Palmer]

I was asking myself the same thing.

[ouidaja]

Keith Perotti
Request response @ knechtlaw at yahoo. Thank You

[grantg2]

" Every two days, I will analyze a new stock. Please make your suggestions."

When I first found this board, I had such high hopes that it would be a useful daily stop. I even marked the board. Wonder what happened?

[Chili Palmer]

HELLOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO

[Young Blood]

$$$$$ ACDU $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$

[Young Blood]

Uh oh

[Chili Palmer]

Any warnings?

[pdgood]

Where's Maydick?

I need direction. I've been told that Netco was positioned ta go big. Wonderin if I can find a guru that may no of warnin signs or gives me the green light.

[goBFHJgo]

SEC target Wile loses motion to dismiss


2009-10-06 14:33 ET - Street Wire


by Mike Caswell

West Vancouver promoter Anthony Wile has lost his motion to have civil fraud charges in New York dismissed. Mr. Wile had sought to have a market manipulation case dismissed on the grounds that the SEC took five years to file it, and then another 1-1/2 years to serve him. Judge Denise Cote, in a decision dated Sept. 30, 2009, has found that the SEC was reasonably diligent in efforts to locate Mr. Wile and serve him with its complaint. The charges are for the manipulation of Sedona Software Solutions Inc. in 2003. The SEC initially filed the suit on Dec. 19, 2007, but it was unable to serve Mr. Wile. A process server could not get past the walls and a gate at Mr. Wile's home, and an investigator was unable to observe anybody matching Mr. Wile's description entering the house. The SEC was only able to serve Mr. Wile on Aug. 29, 2009, after the judge granted special permission to serve him by e-mail and courier. Shortly after receiving the complaint, Mr. Wile filed a motion to have it dismissed.

Judge Cote's decision

Judge Cote, in denying that motion, says it is not appropriate to dismiss the case given that Mr. Wile has known about it since early 2008. She says he chose to gamble that the SEC would be unable to find and serve him. "While Wile was entitled to make that choice, it ill behooves him to complain of the delay in service in such circumstances," the decision reads.

The judge's decision contains a brief history of the events leading up to the motion. Prior to filing the initial complaint, the SEC had been in communication with Mr. Wile's lawyer, Leonard Bloom of Miami, about the possibility of charging him for manipulating Sedona. Mr. Bloom responded to the potential lawsuit with two Wells submissions, documents in which a potential defendant is permitted to argue his side of the case before charges are filed. In some instances, this persuades the SEC that a suit is not necessary.

In Mr. Wile's case, the submissions did not prevent charges. The SEC filed the complaint against him and others on Dec. 19, 2007. After filing the case, the SEC approached Mr. Bloom, and asked if he would accept service on Mr. Wile's behalf. Mr. Bloom said he was not authorized to do so, and refused to provide the SEC with Mr. Wile's address.

The judge has ruled that the SEC's subsequent efforts to to locate and serve Mr. Wile were appropriately diligent. The delay in serving him was caused by circumstances outside of the SEC's control, including the fact that Mr. Wile moved out of the United States. (He previously lived in Boca Raton, Fla.)

In addition, Judge Cote says Mr. Wile has presented little evidence showing that the delay caused him any serious prejudice. For example, he argued that lawyers for the SEC and the other defendants interviewed three witnesses in Canada recently without his participation. He did not, however, identify any question that he would have asked the witness that the other lawyers did not ask.

In addition to rejecting Mr. Wile's motion, Judge Cote has denied a motion to dismiss filed by Mr. Wile's uncle, Wayne Wew (formerly known as Wayne Wile). Mr. Wew had sought to have the case thrown out on similar grounds. The judge rejected his motion on Oct. 2, 2009.

SEC's complaint

The SEC's complaint, filed on Dec. 19, 2007, in the Southern District of New York, claimed that Mr. Wile and others manipulated the market for Sedona and another company, SHEP Technologies Inc. In addition to Mr. Wile and Mr. Wew, the complaint named as defendants Scott and Brian Lines of Bermuda brokerage LOM (Holdings) Ltd.; Vancouver residents Scott Peever and William Curtis; and newsletter writer Robert Chapman. The SEC claimed the men grossed $1.5-million from the Sedona scheme and $4.3-million from SHEP. (All figures are in U.S. dollars.)

The case against Mr. Wile was for the Sedona manipulation. According to the complaint, he issued a series of misleading news releases in January, 2003, for his private company, Renaissance Mining Corp., which was to merge with Sedona. He claimed that Renaissance had acquired producing gold mines in Central South America, the SEC said.

Mr. Wile also recruited several tout sheet authors to repeat those claims, the complaint stated. The only author the SEC named was Mr. Chapman, who purported to be an independent mining analyst. He projected the stock would hit $62. The SEC said Mr. Chapman failed to disclose that he had bought 300,000 shares of the company at 25 cents.

Sedona and Renaissance merged in January, 2003, and the combined company began trading on Jan. 23, 2003. Mr. Wew and the Lines brothers then carried out a series of manipulative trades, according to the complaint. At 9:12 a.m., LOM placed an order to sell 20,000 shares at $9. Thirteen minutes later, Mr. Wew placed an order to buy 5,000 shares at $8.25, the SEC alleged. The activity was unusual, because the stock had last traded at three cents. In the six days after that, the Lines brothers sold 159,300 shares at prices between $9 and $10, the SEC claimed. They had purchased those shares earlier for seven cents.

The SEC halted Sedona on Jan. 29, 2003, citing concerns about the accuracy of its publicly available information. When it resumed trading two weeks later, Sedona quickly fell under $1.

The SHEP manipulation was somewhat similar. Ahead of that manipulation, Mr. Peever, Mr. Curtis and the Lines brothers acquired nine million of the company's shares, or 80 per cent of its tradable stock, the SEC claimed. Then, several paid touts issued recommendations to buy the company. They said its product, a new form of car brakes, was a "billion dollar royalty gusher." The tout sheets failed to disclose that Mr. Peever and Mr. Curtis had paid for the coverage, and that they planned to sell their shares, according to the complaint.

The SHEP scheme continued through the first half of 2003, the SEC claimed. During that time, Mr. Peever, Mr. Curtis and the Lines brothers allegedly sold three million shares. The SEC said they did not report those sales.

The SEC sought orders permanently banning all of the men from participating in penny stock offerings, as well as appropriate civil penalties and disgorgement.

Mr. Peever and Mr. Curtis, without admitting any wrongdoing, settled the case without a trial on Sept. 22, 2008. They agreed to penny stock bans and to financial penalties to be determined by the judge.

The Lines brothers, meanwhile, are fighting the case. They filed separate answers on May 16, 2008, denying any wrongdoing. Scott Lines admitted that accounts at LOM held shares of SHEP, but said they were not held for his benefit.

The judge has not yet set a trial date in the case

[Rev Kilgore Mullet]

I would be very interested to see any of your comments regarding ADVFN. Since they have a board on this site, I assume it's fair game.

[pdgood]

A friggin long line tryin ta get this dudes opinion.

[pdgood]

Do your warnin thing on Netco dude.

The board where everythin gets deleted unless it fits the model. I'll be hangin on every word.

[Keith Maydak]

Just a flake. Pms are instantaneous, put unable to be deleted.

[trifle]

oh, so sorry; y'know I coulda sweared I looked for a pm, and didn't see one, now i do.
is there a delay, or am i just a flake :^(

[Keith Maydak]

I never said I wasn't interested, read your pm.

[@-@]

Swiss to stop UBS handing over data in U.S. tax row
Wed Jul 8, 2009 9:26am EDT

ZURICH (Reuters) - Switzerland has vowed to prevent UBS from handing over client information to U.S. authorities, in an attempt to defend bank secrecy, saying a tax case targeting its main bank is souring diplomatic ties.

Wealth management giant UBS is facing a court hearing in Miami next week after refusing to disclose data on 52,000 Americans holders of secret Swiss bank accounts to U.S. tax authorities.

The Swiss Justice Ministry said on Wednesday that Swiss law prevents UBS from handing over client information and the government would seize UBS client data, if necessary, to stop that happening.

The case, which comes amid a global fight against tax cheats supported by the U.S. administration, has damaged the UBS brand and could result in an expensive settlement for the bank at a time when the bank needs to focus on restructuring.

"Switzerland will use its legal authority to ensure that the bank cannot be pressured to transmit the information illegally, including if necessary by issuing an order taking effective control of the data at UBS," the Swiss government said in a response to U.S. authorities filed in Miami on Tuesday.

The tax litigation is also crucial for the future of the multi-billion dollar wealth management industry and is pushing several offshore banks to force clients to come clean.

A court hearing that will lead to a ruling on the UBS data issue is due to start on July 13. Washington has accused UBS of hiding nearly $15 billion in assets in secret accounts.

The Swiss statement came in response to a filing by the U.S. Justice Department last week asking the Miami court to enforce tax compliance with the full weight of U.S. law.

Although Swiss criminal law prohibits banks passing on client information to foreign authorities, UBS and Switzerland have already made concessions on their treasured bank secrecy.

UBS agreed to pay in February $780 million, admitted wrongdoing and disclosed about 250 client names to avert tax fraud criminal charges the Swiss government said threatened the bank's survival.

And faced with the threat of possible sanctions from the G20, Switzerland -- along with other tax havens -- vowed in March to redraft its tax treaties with the United States and other countries and cooperate more on tax evasion.

"INTERNATIONAL CONFLICT"

Switzerland said in its latest court filing it hoped it would not have to take the "extraordinary action" of issuing an order to seize the UBS client data.

"The IRS (Internal Revenue Service) now inappropriately seeks to provoke international conflict through this civil proceeding," the statement read.

In its brief last week, the Justice Department said that UBS had already acknowledged that its bankers committed "very serious crimes on U.S. soil" and had therefore subjected the bank to the full jurisdiction of U.S. law. "Swiss banking secrecy is not an impenetrable wall," it said.

But Berne said the fact that UBS had released some names in settling the criminal case and admitted wrongdoing did not undermine the legitimacy of Swiss banking secrecy as a whole.

Although the court hearing is due next week, the Swiss government has not ruled out the possibility of UBS and Washington agreeing another out-of-court settlement.

Swiss Finance Minister Hans-Rudolf Merz has repeatedly said there is still room for a deal and Swiss Economy Minister Doris Leuthard told Reuters in an interview on Tuesday that it expected UBS to pay a price as the bank had made mistakes.

Swiss media have said UBS may have to pay 3-5 billion Swiss francs ($2.76-$4.6 billion). The bank raised 3.8 billion francs of capital late in June and will report earnings on August 4.

"As the whole story is about money and as UBS has already admitted its fault, there can be only one solution: the Swiss bank will have to pay a fine or a compensation of an amount corresponding to taxes that are still due to the U.S. government" said Nicolas Michellod, senior analyst at Celent.

UBS shares fell 1.7 percent at 12.8 francs at 0849 GMT against a 1.2 percent drop in the European banking index.

(Additional reporting by Sven Egenter and Emma Thomasson; Editing by Erica Billingham)

[trifle]

Hmmph?

Wussat mean?

Not interested? Well that's ok too, I can't tell unless I ask.

[Keith Maydak]

Hmph.

[Keith Maydak]

I bought a couple thousand dollars worth of TUBM on the open market based on their PRs that they were rolling out a nationwide music channel. Really they concealed a bunch of crap according to the class action.

Millions of dollars were lost by other people, but the class only paid $800,000 total, 30% which went to the attorneys.

So you see who made the bucks.

I opted out as I would have gotten like $50 or something.

I'll probably sue in small claims to recover it.

[trifle]

Aw jeesh, sorry for the delay in responding. Life crap, and didn't see your response till now.

Well, like I sed, the idea is to raise capital for the production company. The model has been used before, create a private stock issuing corporation, and sell shares for investment purposes. Of course the higher the budget the better, but a target capital budget would be on the order of $1.5M minimum, preferably 4 to 5 times that. It has been observed that any full length motion picture production always makes money if the total production cost is less than $2.4M; this is via all the distribution channels modernly available, all the residuals, and ancillary aftermarket merchandising.
(We've got individuals mapped out for the Director, Music Production, Editing, some lead actors. Currently the Script is being adapted from our finished treatment, by Alan J Abrams, will be ready to go in a few weeks)

You can think of far more creative ways such a production can be played than I can on the financials side. A creative endeavor, bumping into the rich and famous is always an opportunity for future possibilities.

I would like to send you a copy of the Treatment, the plotline is a controversial storyline that would generate all kinds of free newsmedia advertising, and we have a few marketing tricks up our sleeves that you in particular would really appreciate.

Don't know what you are doing lately, but it might be fun.

RSVP

[@-@]

Can you tell me about the Tube Media lawsuit and why your name is listed as a person that is not part of the settlement class?

[Keith Maydak]

i m willing 2 listen 4 sure

[@-@]

U.S. SEC charges Madoff middlemen with fraud
Mon Jun 22, 2009 7:27pm EDT


NEW YORK (Reuters) - A brokerage firm and a Hollywood investment adviser that were key middlemen for Wall Street thief Bernard Madoff were hit with civil fraud charges on Monday, accused of steering new clients into the swindler's lair as he sought to keep his massive Ponzi scheme running.

The U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission filed fraud charges against Cohmad Securities Corp, which Madoff and his brother, Peter, partially owned; Cohmad's chairman, Maurice Cohn; and executives Marcia Cohn and Robert Jaffe.

In another suit, the SEC charged Stanley Chais, known for handling investments for Hollywood's elite including director Steven Spielberg. It said Chais oversaw three funds that invested all of their assets with Madoff, ignoring red flags that Madoff's returns were false.

The SEC said Cohmad and its top officers deceived investors who funneled billions of dollars into Madoff's money management business by portraying Madoff as virtually off-limits to new investors.

In fact, the SEC said, Madoff wanted new clients to further his fraud, and rewarded Cohmad and its executives with more than $100 million in fees as reward for their referrals.

Representatives of Manhattan-headquartered Cohmad planted themselves at New Jersey golf clubs, Florida's Palm Beach Country club and exclusive places, in search of new clients, according to the SEC.

"Madoff cultivated an air of exclusivity by pretending that he was too successful to trouble himself with marketing to new investors," said Robert Khuzami, director of the SEC's enforcement division. "In fact, he needed a constant inflow of funds to sustain his fraud, and used his secret control of Cohmad to obtain them."

The lawsuit said Cohmad executives ignored many warnings that Madoff ran a fraud. Madoff, for instance, directed the Cohns to turn away any prospective client who worked in the financial industry as such investors would ask "too many questions," the SEC said.

In the suit against Chais, the SEC said he held himself out for 40 years as an investing wizard, but did nothing more than turn investors' assets over to Madoff, losing clients nearly $1 billion while pocketing $250 million in fees.

Chais, 83, who already faces a lawsuit by the court-appointed trustee who is shutting Madoff's business and seeking assets for investors, has said he too was one of Madoff's victims.

A lawyer for Chais said the SEC lawsuit "paints a distorted and false picture of Stanley Chais" and that "like so many others, Mr. Chais was blindsided and victimized" by Madoff.

Madoff is set to be sentenced on June 29 after pleading guilty in March to bilking his customers out of $65 billion through a long-standing investment swindle in which he used money deposited by newer investors to pay earlier ones.

The SEC previously charged Madoff with fraud, as well as outside auditor David Friehling, who also faces charges of criminal wrongdoing. No one else has been charged criminally.

The SEC cases filed on Monday were brought in U.S. District Court in Manhattan, and seek financial penalties and disgorgement of ill-gotten gains.

Jaffe, 65, of Palm Beach, Florida, said though his attorneys that the SEC lawsuit is "unfair, baseless in the law, and is inaccurate in its understanding of the facts and of Mr. Jaffe."

Jaffe is the son-in-law of one of Madoff's longtime customers, Carl Shapiro.

Attorneys for the other defendants were not immediately available.

FEEDERS UNDER FIRE

Since Madoff's December arrest, investigators have been circling around the middlemen who attracted billions in client funds for him. Madoff was long sought after by investors for providing steady returns in any market environment.

Madoff has admitted his returns were phony, and that he did not even trade in client accounts for years.

The SEC case against Cohmad -- a contraction of the names "Cohn" and "Madoff" -- portrays a firm that played a key role in the Ponzi fraud by finding new Madoff clients. Without new money, such scams collapse under their own weight.

The SEC said Cohmad representatives would project themselves as individuals who became wealthy through Madoff, and when asked, would agree to make an introduction to Madoff.

Cohmad and its representatives would then assist and arrange the opening of accounts with Madoff, the SEC said.

Cohmad's operations were housed in the same building as Madoff's investment arm. The SEC said Cohmad and the Cohns filed false regulatory forms that concealed Cohmad's primary business of bringing in investors for Madoff.

Separately, the trustee shutting down Madoff's business, Irving Picard, sued Cohmad, the Cohns and Jaffe in U.S. Bankruptcy Court in Manhattan, saying any fees it earned from referring clients to Madoff should be returned.

(Reporting by Martha Graybow and Grant McCool; Editing by Gerald E. McCormick, Lisa Von Ahn, Tim Dobbyn)

[trifle]

I envision a stock based corporation, where we can get investors via stock shares sold for investment, to fund the motion picture.

You would make a great producer along these lines, getting investors, funding, et al.

Once the film is made, it has great potential to be a blockbuster, and get a lot of free advertising due it controversial subject and plot.

RSVP pm if nec

[trifle]

As I sed, movie making is more exciting.

Seriously though, we have a script/screenplay ready to go, and we need a producer, and knowing what you can do, this is right down your alley. Perfect to a tee.

Lets bring a new project to life, and make some big bux while we are at it.

[xanadu]

I like the bit about the Ontario and USA SEC cooperation, Some try to claim that our SEC doesn't listen to Ontario nor does Ontario findings have anything to do with the USA. Example FNAT.

[trifle]

Yeah, the NY trifle. Time flice.
Wanna get back into the movie business?
Might be more interesting than what you've been doing here ;^)

[Keith Maydak]

SEC revokes Lexington Resources


2009-06-05 14:51 ET - Street Wire

Also Street Wire (U-*SEC) U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission
Also Street Wire (U-LXRS) Lexington Resources Inc

by Mike Caswell

The U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission has issued an order revoking the registration of Lexington Resources Inc., the pink sheets company allegedly used in a pump-and-dump by Vancouver promoters Grant Atkins and Brent Pierce. The order comes 10 months after the regulator filed an administrative case in which it claimed that Mr. Pierce and his associates made $13-million dumping Lexington as the stock rose to $7.50. (All figures are in U.S. dollars.) The order named Mr. Pierce, Mr. Atkins and Lexington Resources as respondents.

To settle its part of the case, Lexington agreed to today's order revoking its registration. The SEC notes in the order that the company is delinquent in its filings, having not filed an annual report since May 17, 2007, and that it liquidated its only operating subsidiaries in Chapter 7 bankruptcy proceedings.

The SEC's case

The SEC launched the case in an administrative order dated July 31, 2008. It identified Mr. Pierce, 52, as a Canadian living in Vancouver and the Cayman Islands, and Mr. Atkins, 49, as a Vancouver resident. The regulator claimed that Mr. Pierce co-ordinated spam e-mails and newsletters touting the company while he sold his shares through an offshore bank. He allegedly failed to disclose that he controlled as much as 60 per cent of the company.

The SEC said the scheme began in November, 2003, when Mr. Atkins and Mr. Pierce formed Lexington through a reverse merger with a shell company called Intergold Corp. Mr. Atkins was the sole officer and director of the company and Mr. Pierce was a "consultant" who received millions of shares in improper S-8 offerings, the SEC claimed. "Between November 2003 and March 2006, Atkins caused Lexington to issue more than 5 million shares to Pierce and his associates purportedly registered on Form S-8. Pierce told Atkins who should receive the shares and how many," the order stated.

Shares issued in S-8 offerings are normally reserved for those who are not involved in promoting or selling a company's stock, an exemption that did not apply to Mr. Pierce, the SEC said. He allegedly raised all of the money for Lexington's first year of drilling by finding investors who provided loans. The SEC said he transferred some of his S-8 shares to those investors.

In addition, the SEC alleged that he used his S-8 shares to pay for an extensive promotional campaign. He arranged for spam e-mails, newsletters and advertising on investing websites, according to the order. He also distributed promotional kits to thousands of potential investors, the SEC claimed. As a result of the promotion, the stock went from $3 to $7.50 per share, with average trading volume increasing from 1,000 to about 100,000 shares per day, the SEC said. (The stock subsequently collapsed, and last traded for two cents.)

During the promotion, Mr. Pierce and his associates allegedly sold 2.5 million shares that they had deposited at an offshore bank, generating $13-million in proceeds, the SEC claimed. "Pierce personally sold at least $2.7 million in Lexington stock through the offshore bank in June 2004 alone. Pierce's sales were not registered with the Commission," the order read.

The SEC also cited Mr. Pierce for failing to disclose his ownership of the company. It said he controlled between 10 per cent and 60 per cent of Lexington's shares between November, 2003, and May, 2004, but did not file a single Schedule 13D disclosing any share ownership until July 25, 2006. When he did file the belated Schedule 13D, it inaccurately stated that he owned or controlled between 5 per cent and 10 per cent of the company in late 2003, the SEC claimed.

The SEC did not state what penalties it is seeking for the alleged pump-and-dump. Mr. Atkins settled with the regulator on Nov. 26, 2008, agreeing to an order barring him from future violations of the U.S. Securities Act. With the Lexington settlement, the case only remains outstanding against Mr. Pierce.

vFinance case

In a related case, the SEC fined Florida brokerage vFinance Investments Inc. $100,000 on Nov. 7, 2008, for failing to produce e-mails during the Lexington investigation. The SEC said it was seeking information on two of the firm's clients. It identified one as Newport Capital, and the other as Hypo Alpe-Adria Bank of Liechtenstein. (The SEC made no allegations against either client, but one, Hypo Alpe, received a cease trade order from the B.C. Securities Commission on May 28, 2008. The regulator stated that Hypo Alpe was a conduit for suspicious trading. The bank had refused to disclose the identities of clients who had sold $165-million worth of stock in several pink sheets and OTC Bulletin Board companies, citing privacy laws in Liechtenstein.)

The SEC claimed that the brokerage permitted one of its employees, Nicholas Thompson, to use an external webmail service, against brokerage policies. This allowed him to circumvent the brokerage's e-mail storage system. The SEC also sought to examine Mr. Thompson's computer, but he did not produce it until six months later. When the SEC did finally receive the computer, it found no useful information. The regulator said it hired a forensic investigator, who determined that somebody had run a data destruction program on the drive.

BCSC previously banned Pierce

On June 8, 1993, the BCSC banned Mr. Pierce for 15 years, after he improperly received money from Bu-Max Gold Corp., a former Vancouver Stock Exchange listing. According to an agreed statement of facts, the company raised $210,000 in May, 1989, for exploration. It paid $100,000 of that money to a private company controlled by Mr. Pierce "for purposes which did not benefit Bu-Max," the statement read.

In addition to the 15-year ban, Mr. Pierce agreed to pay a $15,000 fine. That ban expired on June 8, 2008.







A fee has not been paid to Stockwatch to distribute this bulletin.
STOCKWATCH DOES NOT SELL OR DISCLOSE ITS MAILING LIST TO ANY THIRD PARTY.
You are subscribed to this mailing list because you registered at www.stockwatch.com

[Keith Maydak]

SEC wins $2.04-million (U.S.) order against Pierce


2009-06-09 14:16 ET - Street Wire

Also Street Wire (U-*SEC) U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission

by Mike Caswell

The U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission has secured an order requiring Vancouver promoter Brent Pierce to disgorge $2.04-million that he made by selling shares of Lexington Resources Inc., a now-defunct pink sheets oil and gas company. (All figures are in U.S. dollars.) The order, contained in a decision handed down Friday by Administrative Law Judge Carol Foelak, comes 10 months after the SEC filed an administrative case alleging that Mr. Pierce and his associates made $13-million dumping Lexington as the stock rose to $7.50. It claimed that he co-ordinated an e-mail spam campaign and newsletters, while selling the company through an offshore bank.

The SEC convened a three-day hearing in Seattle on Feb. 2, 2009, to hear arguments in the case. Although Mr. Pierce was represented by his lawyer, Christopher Wells, he did not personally testify. He said that he was concerned he could be arrested if federal prosecutors discovered he was at the Seattle courthouse because they are investigating him for another company, CellCyte Genetics Corp.

Judge Foelak's decision

The judge, in a decision dated June 5, 2009, stated that Mr. Pierce's failure to appear in person was unexpected, and that she was entitled to draw an adverse inference from it. The SEC had called Mr. Pierce as a witness, and the hearing had been scheduled for February because Mr. Pierce had indicated he would not be available to testify in December. "Pierce's failure to give assurances against future violations or to recognize the wrongful nature of his conduct is underscored by his failure to appear in person and give testimony on these or any other topics," her decision reads. Instead of having in-person testimony, the judge treated his earlier depositions, which were taken in Vancouver, as testimony.

In finding against Mr. Pierce, the judge described his conduct as "egregious and recurrent." She said he sold unregistered shares of Lexington and took active steps to evade the reporting requirements of the U.S. Securities Act. In addition to the disgorgement order, the judge entered an order preventing future violations of the U.S. Securities Act.

One of the SEC's allegations was that Mr. Pierce was a behind-the-scenes control person at Lexington during the pump-and-dump. The judge agreed, noting that he held over 10 per cent of the company's shares and had considerable sway over the company's chief executive officer, Grant Atkins. The men met in the early 1990s, when Mr. Pierce hired Mr. Atkins to write a business plan for a company. They have since worked together at 10 companies, the judge said. During the Lexington promotion, Mr. Atkins consulted with Mr. Pierce repeatedly about the company. They spoke multiple times every week during 2003 and 2004, the judge found. In addition, Mr. Pierce directly controlled Lexington's consultants.

The judge also agreed with the SEC's allegation that Mr. Pierce executed several share transactions to avoid having a 10-per-cent ownership interest in Lexington, which would have triggered reporting requirements. In one of these transactions, Mr. Pierce assigned shares to Newport Capital Corp., a private Belize company. "Pierce testified that he transferred 350,000 shares to Newport to satisfy some of his debt to Newport; Atkins testified that the transfer was to enable Pierce to avoid having a ten percent beneficial ownership in Lexington," the judge stated.

Mr. Pierce claimed he did not own Newport, but the judge disagreed. She found that he was the beneficial owner, president and director of the company. She said he received a salary of $800,000 from Newport in 2005.

The judge said that Mr. Pierce used Hypo Bank of Liechtenstein as a conduit to sell his shares during the alleged pump-and-dump. As of April 30, 2004, he held 446,683 shares there, which he had sold by September, 2004, for gross proceeds of $2,113,362, the judge found. His total cost for the shares was $70,000, leaving him with a profit of $2,043,362. (On May 28, 2008, the B.C. Securities Commission issued a cease trade order against Hypo Bank, stating that it was a conduit for suspicious trading. The bank had refused to disclose the identities of clients who had sold $165-million worth of stock in several pink sheets and OTC Bulletin Board companies, citing privacy laws in Liechtenstein.)

Judge Foelak also noted that the BCSC banned Mr. Pierce for 15 years in 1993 after he improperly received money from Bu-Max Gold Corp., a former Vancouver Stock Exchange listing. The company raised $210,000 (Canadian) in May, 1989, for exploration. It paid $100,000 (Canadian) of that money to a private company controlled by Mr. Pierce for purposes which did not benefit Bu-Max.

The judge declined a late request by the SEC to increase the disgorgement by $7-million. After the hearing, the regulator said it had discovered new evidence indicating that Mr. Pierce had received an additional $7-million in ill-gotten gains by selling shares through two companies, Jenirob Company Ltd. and Newport Capital. Based on this evidence, the SEC asked her to raise the disgorgement, but the judge refused. She said she could not order disgorgement for any shares that those companies may have sold, because the SEC made no mention of either company in its initial order instituting proceedings.

The order from Judge Foelak is an initial decision, which means that Mr. Pierce has 30 days to appeal her findings or file a motion for reconsideration. After that, the decision becomes binding.







A fee has not been paid to Stockwatch to distribute this bulletin.
STOCKWATCH DOES NOT SELL OR DISCLOSE ITS MAILING LIST TO ANY THIRD PARTY.
You are subscribed to this mailing list because you registered at www.stockwatch.com

[Keith Maydak]

SEC target Offill loses bid to move case home


2009-06-10 14:39 ET - Street Wire

Also Street Wire (U-*SEC) U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission
Also Street Wire (U-AVLL) AVL Global Inc

by Mike Caswell

Phillip Offill, the former U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission lawyer indicted for fraud, has lost a motion to have his criminal case moved from Virginia to his home state of Texas. U.S. District Judge Liam O'Grady issued an order denying the motion on June 2, 2009. He did not provide his reasons. Mr. Offill had sought to have the case moved from Virginia on the grounds that the indictment does not allege that he committed any fraud in that state. He also said that he could not afford a lawyer in Virginia, and that a friend in Texas had agreed to represent him there.

Prosecutors allege that Mr. Offill and a former associate, David Stocker, helped promoters of several OTC Bulletin Board companies obtain millions of unregistered shares in their companies. One of the stocks was AVL Global Inc., an alleged pump-and-dump run by Ontario father and son Peter and Tyler Fisher. Mr. Offill pled not guilty to the charges on March 27, 2009, and he is currently free on a $50,000 bond. (All figures are in U.S. dollars.)

While the judge denied Mr. Offill's motion for a change of venue, he did approve his request for a federal public defender. Mr. Offill made the request on June 8, 2009, citing his financial condition, and the judge approved it the same day. The judge said he had reviewed a financial affidavit from Mr. Offill (which is sealed) and had determined that Mr. Offill was indigent.

Offill's indictment

Prosecutors indicted Mr. Offill in the Eastern District of Virginia on March 12, 2009. They claimed that he and Mr. Stocker were behind a scheme that helped insiders of nine companies obtain millions of free-trading shares in violation of the registration requirements of the U.S. Securities Act. To facilitate the scheme, Mr. Offill allegedly incorporated private companies in Texas and purported to have those companies buy shares of the public companies using a Rule 504 exemption, which applies to accredited investors who do not intend to resell the stock. Then he transferred those shares to insiders using legal opinions prepared by Mr. Stocker, according to the indictment.

In the case of AVL Global, Mr. Offill and Mr. Stocker allegedly helped the Fishers obtain 10 million free-trading shares. Prosecutors claimed that Mr. Offill, in one of the transactions, purported to buy five million shares of the company on July 27, 2004, for $50,000. The same day, he sent a signed, blank stock transfer form for those shares to Mr. Stocker, the indictment stated. Mr. Stocker then signed an opinion letter stating that the shares complied with Rule 504, and could be freely traded, and transferred them to entities designated by the Fishers, according to the indictment.

(In a separate civil case, the SEC claimed that the Fishers then started issuing false and misleading news releases touting AVL Global. One of the news releases said that the company could have a substantial contract to sell GPS tracking devices to the government of Botswana. The stock went to a $4.10 high on Dec. 16, 2004, and the Fishers sold thousands of shares, the SEC claimed. Mr. Offill denies any wrongdoing in that case, as do the Fishers.)

Virginia prosecutors identified eight other companies that Mr. Offill and Mr. Stocker allegedly followed the same pattern with. They are Emerging Holdings Inc., MassClick Inc., China Score Inc., Auction Mills Inc., Custom-Designed Compressor Systems Inc., Ecogate Inc., Media International Concepts Inc. and Vanquish Productions Inc.

Motion to change venue

Mr. Offill filed a motion to change the venue for the case on April 7, 2009. In it, he said that nearly all of the witnesses in the case, many of whom are in jail, would have to travel great distances to testify in Virginia, but most are close to Dallas. Mr. Offill also claimed that he would have to incur unbearable expenses travelling to Virginia and obtaining lodging for motion practice, discovery and trial. He cited an earlier restraining order in the case, which froze nearly all of his assets, including his 2001 Harley-Davidson motorcycle and his 1972 Porsche 911.

Mr. Offill also claimed that a trial in Virginia would disrupt or destroy his business, which is providing consulting and paralegal services to lawyers. (He is not allowed to work as a lawyer in Texas, because the state bar suspended him on March 13, 2008, for intending to destroy or conceal documents when he knew a former client was about to sue him. The SEC later suspended him from practising before the commission.)

Government response

Prosecutors filed their response to the motion for a transfer on April 14, 2009. In it, they said that the case had substantial connections to Virginia, in that one of the companies allegedly used in the scheme, Emerging Holdings, was based there. In addition, many spams touting the stocks were sent by AOL servers in Virginia and many of the scheme's victims were located there.

Prosecutors also claimed that the investigators who conducted interviews resided in Washington, D.C., and in Virginia. Moving the case would significantly inconvenience the government witnesses and increase the cost of travel, the reply stated. In addition, they said that several of Mr. Offill's co-conspirators were successfully prosecuted in Virginia. "This district has developed significant knowledge regarding this case," the response read. "Duplicating these efforts in Texas ... would waste limited judicial resources."

The case has not yet been scheduled for trial.







A fee has not been paid to Stockwatch to distribute this bulletin.
STOCKWATCH DOES NOT SELL OR DISCLOSE ITS MAILING LIST TO ANY THIRD PARTY.
You are subscribed to this mailing list because you registered at www.stockwatch.com
To unsubscribe, please go to

[Keith Maydak]

SEC files insider trading suit against Ontario men


2009-06-11 14:14 ET - Street Wire

Also Street Wire (U-*SEC) U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission

by Mike Caswell

The U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission has filed an insider trading lawsuit against an Ontario scrap metal worker and two of his friends, after they allegedly received non-public information about pending takeovers from an administrative assistant at Merrill Lynch Canada Inc. The complaint, filed June 10, 2009, in the Southern District of New York, alleges that Michael Goodman of Thornill, Ont., learned about takeovers from his wife in 2005, when she worked in Merrill Lynch's Toronto office. The SEC says he then passed the information on to two friends, who bought shares based on his tips.

The complaint identifies Mr. Goodman, 36, as an employee of a scrap metal company. His co-defendants are Martin Gollan, 63, a scrap metal dealer from North York, Ont., and Phillip Macdonald, 48, a lawyer from North York. The SEC says that Mr. Gollan and Mr. Macdonald made a combined $1,023,054 in trading profits based on Mr. Goodman's tips. (All figures are in U.S. dollars.)

According to the complaint, Mr. Goodman's wife worked at Merrill Lynch between January and June, 2005, as an assistant to managing directors who advised clients on contemplated mergers, acquisitions and tender offers. As part of her job, she had access to the identities of companies that could be subject to takeovers, the SEC says. The complaint states that she sometimes mentioned those companies to her husband during phone conversations. "Goodman's wife expected that her husband would keep this information confidential and believed that her husband understood that the conversations concerning these companies were confidential," the complaint reads.

The SEC says Mr. Goodman used this information to earn favour with Mr. Gollan. He sold scrap metal to Mr. Gollan, and spoke with him regularly about business and stocks, the complaint states. He also sought to earn favour with Mr. Macdonald, a friend he met in a bar in 2002 with whom he also had some business dealings, the SEC claims.

"Between January and June 2005 ... Goodman tipped Macdonald and Gollan about the identities of target companies involved in contemplated, but as yet unannounced, business combinations in which Merrill Canada or Merrill was involved," the complaint reads. It lists the companies as Creo Inc., Masonite International Corp., Eon Labs, Inc., Performance Food Group Company, Great Lakes Chemical Corp., Shopko Stores Inc., Electronics Boutiques Holdings Corp. and Commercial Federal Corp.

The SEC says both Mr. Macdonald and Mr. Gollan knew or should have known that the information they were trading on was non-public. According to the complaint, Mr. Macdonald was aware that the company names were coming Mr. Goodman's wife, who worked at Merrill Lynch. It also states that Mr. Gollan should have known, after the third or fourth time that he received a tip about a merger ahead of the announcement, that Mr. Goodman had obtained the information in breach of confidence.

The complaint describes several phone calls between Merrill Lynch's office, Mr. Goodman and his friends. In one example, the SEC claims that a director at Merrill Lynch sent an e-mail to Mr. Goodman's wife concerning a fairness opinion for "Project 29," a code name used for the proposed acquisition of Burnaby-based Creo by Eastman Kodak Company. That afternoon, Mr. Goodman's wife called him, and two minutes later, he called Mr. Gollan, the SEC says. Three minutes after that, Mr. Gollan allegedly placed an order for 3,500 shares of Creo through an account at CIBC World Markets. Two days later, on Jan. 31, 2005, Eastman Kodak announced that it would acquire Creo, and the price of the stock went from $17.89 (Canadian) to $20.07 (Canadian). The pattern was similar for the other tips, the complaint states.

The SEC claims that Mr. Macdonald's ill-gotten gains from the transaction were about $900,000, while Mr. Gollan made over $90,000. The complaint does not allege that Mr. Goodman himself made any money, or bought any of the stocks that he tipped his friends to buy.

The SEC is seeking disgorgement of ill-gotten gains, appropriate civil penalties and orders preventing future violations of the U.S. Securities Act.

Mr. Goodman, without admitting any wrongdoing, has settled his part of the case. He has agreed to an injunction barring future violations of the U.S. Securities Act. He has also agreed that he is liable for the ill-gotten gains by Mr. Macdonald and Mr. Gollan plus $251,301 in interest, but he will not have to pay those amounts based on his sworn statement of financial condition. The other two defendants have not responded to the allegations.

The SEC acknowledged the assistance of the Ontario Securities Commission with the case.







A fee has not been paid to Stockwatch to distribute this bulletin.
STOCKWATCH DOES NOT SELL OR DISCLOSE ITS MAILING LIST TO ANY THIRD PARTY.
You are subscribed to this mailing list because you registered at www.stockwatch.com

[Keith Maydak]

ny trifle?

[Keith Maydak]

I got out of the film production business in the 1990s.

[trifle]

Glad to see Hurcules has calmed down. He was a one trick pony.
You answered all of his questions, and he still wouldn't let it go.

I gotta film that needs production funding, any suggestions or sources?

[Bob Stocks]

Show me the SPNG report!!!

Is it ready?

Cheers,

Bob

[xanadu]

May have already seen this. Although this was filed 10/08 the stocks, in the most part, have still been trading here. Bruce A Thompson has been successful of getting the mod position on two of the iHub boards, FNAT and ETGG, and at least has posted this there.

http://www.osc.gov.on.ca/Enforcement/Proceedings/SOA/soa_20081016_boocki.pdf