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.
so no short cover or what? will be interesting to watch them sort this out.
Judge Shaw declared today that the MODR/MDNO reverse stock split is null and void.
watching this one. interesting things happening to say the least.
When the St. Louis Federal Court Judge Shaw rules tomorrow that Scottrade must cover their 999,000 share short position in MDNO, Scottrade will also have to cover their 99,900,000 share short position on GPGD. That's nearly 100 mil short in GPGD.
That's a huge opportunity to make some real money, by buying GPGD today at $0.014 and/or MDNO at $0.41
either way, the pps should rise and maybe MDNO will get it's reputation back and be traded easier than it is now.
Nice to see some volume and PPS increased.
I don't have the cusip as the shares have yet to appear in either of my Ameritrade accounts.
I don't know if the 1 year restriction begins on the issue date or the date they are deposited in your account. Not much difference, either way.
I agree. I believe that ST will be forced to buy-in. MDNO has all of their requirements in line. They notified the WY SOS's office, filed the required notifications with NASDAQ, had the 65% approval from shareholders, etc, etc.
ST will be much better off by negotiating directly with MDNO for the issuance of the 999,000 shares they are short. ST will not want to buy on the open market as such would be uncontrolled and create too much uncertainty.
Do you have the CUSIP # 607587201? Is that the Cusip # for GPGD?
If so, we won't be able to sell 90% of those until 11/28/2008, correct? Since it occured 11/27/2007.
Thanks for the info. ETRADE doesn't seem to know anything even though they seem to be the defendant in this case.
Very strange
Here's my guess: "Possibility 1 for 50 cents please, Alex".
Do not make assumptions. I own no MDNO shares. I am only here for the entertainment to see what happens.
Why did you buy into MDNO in the first place?
Very True. I would suspect as with about any legal case, whatever the decision ultimately is it could be appealed.
This then could lead to a settlement possibly.
This is a very interesting case since brokers are on both sides of the case. (unlike with GVRP where it was basically the world against investors)
Several possibilities come to mind in terms of a settlement:
* ST pay out more than the current pps to buy "new" shares from the company - Thus about a 50% increase in the OS. The pps would have to be high enough to benefit the company (and shareholders) and yet not to high as to scare ST away. What would that price be? $1 to $2 a share? Who knows. This would result in giving the company capital to grow a line of business or conduct a merger or get off the greys.
* A court decision forcing ST to buy back the shares which they appealed but could not obtain a TRO on (after the decision came down). In this case ST might have to cover and then appeal? Not sure how that would all play out. Perhaps a more likely road would be the TRO after the decision while an appeal went on.
* ST prevails and the toggle is placed back on the company to deal with the issues with the RS.
This should be a very interesting situation because in theory it can at least be resolved in the market place. GVRP was a far more difficult issue to resolve in the market place.
Was the float here something like 500K or so?
Now assume that was the float and imagine an error occurring where 69 MILLION shares were sold for a company with an OS of 1.2M and a float of 500K. Now you understand the magnitude of the GVRP problem!
is the Judge's decision appealable by either party. If so, this could get really tied up unless ST is willing to settle out of court. This is an interesting case either way you look at it.
I disagree there. This one will be decided in the courts and the SEC's hands will be tied. If the judge says the short position needs to be covered then a huge move could happen here!
I would much prefer a judge decide my fate that the SEC.
At least that way investors have a fair change at justice!
Agreed, this one's road meat. Stench-alicious.
No double print, ONE trade.
MODERN ENERGY CP - Nasdaq National Market: MDNO
Time & Sales most recent next page
Rec. Time Action Price Volume
12:24:32 PM Trade 0.37 1160
Collusion. Same was done with GVRP. Once the stock was suspended and served 2 weeks it was tradeable. Since the SEC had stated that all future trades would not be protected by the Net Capital rule all brokers simply said "We wont trade this". A huge problem exists. We will just bury it. End of story.
Why should a broker who delivered you shares be allowed to tell you you cannot sell the shares at a later time?
If a broker has "bought shares" in the market place for you that broker should be liable for ensuring they delivered valid shares to you. Unless regulators have suspended trading in the stock you should be allowed to place an order to try to sell the stock. PERIOD.
If one or more market makers are trading the stock then the potential should exist for your order to fill.
I just checked my Ameritrade accounts. I have yet to receive my GPGD shares.
MDNO has been available to trade since day 1. There has never been a restriction.
I'm sure today's trade was a double print. So, actually, only 580 shares were traded.
If the GPGD shares are in your account, you are able to trade 10% of them now. The other 90% are restricted for one year.
Ameritrade won't let me place a 'Buy' or 'Sell'. 'This order could not be placed'.... Had a GTC order to sell MDNO get kicked out this AM: Canceled Sell 1000 MDNO Limit 3.48 -- 12/13/07 07:50:59 12/13/07
I don't know how the 1160 @ .37 for $429.20 made it through. ~ASW~
So was that 1160 @ .37 trade an isolated incident and which MM did that go through? Is MDNO trading again, I haven't seen a pr.
Hi Southern Gal
I am in MDNO. I look and see the cusip # for the dividend of GPGD and shares in my portfolio.
I called ETRADE and they really didn't know much about it. After reading some more info it looks like ETRADE is one of the defendants in this case with Scottrade.
Has any ruling been made on this and if we as MDNO shareholders have the right to those GPGD shares and when we will be able to trade them?
Thanks!
You need to start a thread called "I SOLD shares of MDNO thru ST".
People who made 130 times their money were nervous and most would have gladly returned the money for their shares back at one point.
In fact, one guy became quite angry with AT when they would not allow him to buy his shares back at twice the price (.0002 vs. .0001) and feared that for an original investment of less than $1,000 he was going to lose hundreds of thousands of dollars and go bankrupt.
Here, there is only ONE person who sold the shares and that person will quite possibly go bankrupt IMO. This problem would not have the potential to cause ST to go bankrupt IMO.
Such was not the case with GVRP.
MDNO is much less of a problem than GVRP was. Think of the highest mountain you have ever seen and the smallest ant hill. GVRP is the mountain and MDNO is the ant hill. The reason you should study and understand GVRP is so that you are prepared for less than a fair settlement here. No one says just because you are right you will receive ONE penny for your stock. Tomorrow the SEC could suspend this and invoke the Net Capital rule "for mistakes that have been made to date" and note that any future trades would not be covered by the Net Capital rule. If they were to do that kiss your money good bye.
Being RIGHT only matters in a Market place that has INTEGRITY - The US is the MOST CORRUPT marketplace in the world.
This should allow for a fair settlement with MDNO.
Then again, it would likely cost ST millions of dollars to cover 1M shares of a stock with an OS of 1.2M
ST was the most BLATANT broker in regards to GVRP.
They sent unrequested paper certificates out to wash their hands of the risk. Of course they would never except those back! No other brokers did this.
They also sent a letter trying to coerce those with retirement accounts. Others who had GVRP with a different broker never received these letters.
Just be prepared for ST to do whatever they can to try to avoid paying a nickel out. One has already seen this with the lawsuit IMO.
The one good thing you have going for you is other brokers on the other side.
OK- I concede whatever you say about GVRP. Can we discuss MDNO?
You are assuming that Market Integrity exists. GVRP had the entire float sold 13,800,000 percent. 99% of those holding shares lost all of their money due to the fine actions of the SEC to protect investors. Regulators allowed ONE share to be sold 138,000 times.
Knock Knock.
Who's there?
The biggest FRAUD on Wall Street! Guess who that is!
are there links to these papers that were filed or do I have to call the SOS of WY? Boy if Scottrade did screw up then MDNO shareholders are gonna have a nice SQUEEEZE!!!! I will B bouncing back and forth during all this, so don't take it personal.
Once again, there was a vote. Better than 65% voted in favor of the corporate restructuring.
Once again, MDNO did file the required papers with the Wyoming Secretary of State.
Once again, MODR/MDNO did notify the governing bodies as to the details of the corporate restructuring.
Once again, said details were published well in advance of the restructuring.
Once again, a new symbol and cusip # was issued.
Once again, Scottrade didn't adjust their client's account by the 1:1000 ratio.
Scottrade then sold one million shares.
Aye. Im one who got in Post-R/S.
Heres the thing though... insiders control over 65% of stock. All they need is that 65% to agree... a simple majority.
So the rest of shareholders in essence could vote, but its a moot point on their choice here.
So, Scottrade may be trying semantics here, but it really doesnt hold much water.
Argonath
According to the TRO Complaint, Wyoming State Law requires..blah blah blah...read #61 of the complaint...
well here is the statute #61 refers to:
17-16-705. Notice of meeting.
(a) A corporation shall notify shareholders of the date, time, place and means of communication of each annual and special shareholders' meeting no fewer than ten (10) nor more than sixty (60) days before the meeting date. Unless this act or the articles of incorporation require otherwise, the corporation is required to give notice only to shareholders entitled to vote at the meeting.
(b) Unless this act or the articles of incorporation require otherwise, notice of an annual meeting need not include a description of the purpose or purposes for which the meeting is called.
(c) Notice of a special meeting shall include a description of the purpose or purposes for which the meeting is called.
(d) If not otherwise fixed under W.S. 17-16-703 or 17-16-707, the record date for determining shareholders entitled to notice of and to vote at an annual or special shareholders' meeting is the day before the first notice is delivered to shareholders.
(e) Unless the bylaws require otherwise, if an annual or special shareholders' meeting is adjourned to a different date, time, place or means of communication, notice need not be given of the new date, time, place or means of communication if the new date, time place or means of communication is announced at the meeting before adjournment. If a new record date for the adjourned meeting is or shall be fixed under W.S. 17-16-707, however, notice of the adjourned meeting shall be given under this section to persons who are shareholders as of the new record date.
Now this brings a new opinion to this matter. There was a vote, Scottrade calims they weren't notified by The Company because, I'm assuming, ST wasn't entitled to vote. Each and every line of ST's complaint needs to be broken down and they need to prove their claims of course. but the defendents also have to come up with counter-claims to prove them wrong.
I don't have a vested interest in MDNO, but I do have an interest in this case and what precedence this will set for the markets. Chaos is NOT good, and that isn't what I'm implying. I'm analysing this case by using the LAW and pointing out the issues and who is at fault here. Plus I'm babbling along the way to see what arguments their could be in this case.
Also, has NASD ever "signed off" on the daily list that they shouldn't have because a Company made an error and NASD didn't catch it? If so, then the daily list isn't fulproof.
If 51% of shareholders vote YES the remaining 49% do not need to be solicited for a vote. Happens all the time where the company simply has a filing or a PR and says "we the majority have voted and decided to do squat, we are nt soliciting your opinion (Mr minority squat holder)".
In fact with GVRP the insider 11 shares got together and voted a "majority" vote even though I had 1000 settled shares in my account. They did so by not recognizing the shares that had been settled and were present in my account. The company further backdated a FL SOS document stating a majority vote had occurred increasing the authorized share structure after the shares were to have already been delivered (and had been delivered at some brokerages). I was never solicited nor was any other GVRP shareholder (other than the insider 11 who sold one share 138,000 times). From my viewpoint a precedence has been set with GVRP where investors were cheated (by regulators). Now let's be consistent here. ST is in a bind, Screw em!
The fact that the company appears on the daily list is the only critical issue here. The NASD by having the info on the daily list "signed off" on the reorganization.
You seem to be suggesting that CHAOS is good for the market place. You seem to be suggesting that companies should be able to appear on the daily list, do a massive FS or RS, have a bunch of trades occur, and then say - oops nevermind. We didnt like how it worked out for us and we decided to not do the split afterall. The whole purpose of the daily list is to create order. When the NASD put the issue on the daily list they certified the issuer had complied. Too late to undo later.
Modern Energy notified NASDAQ of the corporate action on October 5, 2007, with an effective date of October 16, 2007, providing more than the NASD-required 10-day notice. On October 18 and 19, 2007 NASDAQ published the terms of the reorganization listing the addition of MDNO and the deletion of MODR at: http://www.otcbb.com/asp/dailylist_detail.asp?d=10/18/2007&mkt_ctg=NON-OTCBB and at http://www.otcbb.com/asp/dailylist_detail.asp?d=10/19/2007&mkt_ctg=NON-OTCBB. These notices clearly stated that MODR was deleted effective 10/19/2007, with the comment: "Reorganization (.001 sh of Modern Energy Corp. New Common Stk & 100,000 restricted shs of Modern Energy Corp. Preferred Stock, Class B)"
Modern Energy issued a press release on October 11, 2007, providing the details of the restructuring along with the record date. More than 51% of shareholders approved of the recapitalization. Additionally, Modern Energy management believes that on the trade date in question, Modern Energy shareholders that held the pre-restructuring Modern Energy (Symbol-MODR) had yet to receive their post-restructuring shares (Symbol-MDNO) in their accounts, so they would not have been available to sell, even if the shareholders desired. Management of Modern Energy expected that MDNO would open near $1.00, reflecting the innovative share restructuring that also created preferred shares that effectively represent warrants to purchase MDNO common shares for $1.00 a share, which, if converted, would double the number of issued common shares to 2,400,000. (Modern Energy closed at $0.001 a share as MODR the day before the new symbol MDNO became effective.) Yet, inexplicably, Scottrade apparently did not inform their client of the change in shares outstanding, despite being informed through NASDAQ notification of the symbol and CUSIP change and the reason for these changes.
did own any shares B4 or after the RS?
nope. i dont own any!!!!
Did you recieved notification of a vote to re-organize the Share Structure of Modern Energy Corp from the Company?
Has any shareholder here recieved notification of a vote to re-organize the Share Structure of modern Energy Corp?
I know this might not work since most shareholders here are long after the R/S was created.
Second off....
It was on the daily list!
After GVRP and the ONE tradeable share was sold 138,000 times by insiders and their friends the SEC is a total JOKE.
Market Integrity does not exist in the USA because of the SEC!
Suddenly Everyones Corrupt
First off...
Show me the proof that MDNO failed to contact shareholders, and receive approval for the R/S?
Thats a might big accusation, and since in your post you SAID it occurred, I look forward to your evidence. And dont use Scottrade's attempted defense as your proof. A defense attempt, is NOT a proven occurance. Similar to using an insanity plea... have to PROVE you were insane at the time, the Prosecution doesnt have to prove you are NOT.
Second... a mistake? Ummmm... fraud is MORE than a mistake. Just ask Scooter Libby who made a small mistake in a grand jury hearing and received a STRONG sentence (commuted of course) for that mistake.
ROFL... youre a trip, and I look forward to your post SHOWING us proof that MDNO committed fraud in their process, and how Scottrade made a 'little' mistake.
Especially when NSSelling is such a hot topic these days... just ask E-trade.
Argonath
the argument is just the same as if you drive w/o your car being registered for a month and somebody hits you not fault of your own, YOU are responsible, because YOU didn't follow the legal procedure of registering your car. I'm not saying Scottrade didn't make a mistake, I'm saying that because MDNO failed to follow the rule of law, the reorganization of shares will be held void. IMHO...after reading 63, 64, 65
Dealerschools argument is a straw man.
You cannot justify one case of fraud by attempting to use another 'potential' instance as your jusitfication for committing your illegal actions.
If MDNO DID commit fraud by lying about their process for their R/S, that is a separate issue to be determined by the SEC or the courts.
BUT... whether fraud or not by MDNO, Scottrade committed and act of fraud, regardless of the situation, and should be punished accordingly FOR that fraud.
It will all depend if the Judge gets taken behind closed doors and TOLD what to rule by the SEC. Otherwise, this one is pretty cut and dry.
Argonath
The RS was on the daily list therefore governing bodies approved the RS.
The purpose of the daily list is to communicate among other things splits and reorgs.
How can a broker claim something on the daily list should not have happened.
The NASD uses the daily list to communicate to brokers and the public splits, etc.
The MDNO RS should not have happened is what the issue is. ST is claiming MDNO gave no notice to it's shareholders about a VOTE for RS which is required under MDNO Laws of Incorporation.
you wrote:
Looks Like Scottrade obtained the TRO and MDNO isn't trading now?
my reply:
MDNO is available to trade. I checked with DOMS (the MM) and they confirmed this. However, given the TRO that Stottrade obtained against the forced buy-ins, traders are waiting for a ruling before buying more shares.
---------------
MDNO DID conduct a shareholder vote to authorize the corporate restructuring. Insiders hold more than 65%- thus a vote beyond the 65% was not needed. MDNO DID file the required papers with the WY secretary of state.
IMO, Stottrade is grasping at straws. They are in a very bad place and are looking at a huge financial exposure. If they are forced to buy-in, and based on what I've seen, I believe that this will be case, Scottrade will drive the PPS dramatically higher.
besides it was on the daily list. it was authorized. ST failed to properly assess the information that appeared on the daily list IMO.
A better question is how do brokers get away with doing an unauthorized RS which never appeared on the daily list like what was done with GVRP.
You wrote:
My opinion has changed in that MDNO did not send a notice to shareholders to vote on a RS, which is really what happened here(65), AND Scottrade rightfully declares the short transaction void because the RS was not properly authorized and should noy have been issued(66).
My reply:
MODR/MDNO had approval from more than 65% of the shareholders; thus giving them the authorization and legal right to conduct the corporate restructuring. (Insiders hold more than 65% of the stock)
rules are rules. regulators not applying the rules "because it is the pinks is wrong
No where in the regulations does it say "except the pinks" where rules do not apply and anybody can do anything and we look the other way.
Why do the selectively enforce the rules in the pinks to cause covering to occur when investors have made a mistake and MMs benefit?
This is not news.
What is news that some are finally waking up to realize most pinks are stacked against the retail investor, and the only way to make money here is by exception to the rule(s)
It was on the daily list. ST clearly screwed up. All the talk about bailing out subprime lenders, why the heck should ST be bailed out? Brokers have a responsibility and should have to pay up. Brokers should have cancelled any open trades when MODR appeared on the daily list. In Japan OOPS are met with American brokers holding their hands out for 20 MILLION dollars. When an American broker screws up they are bailed out by regulators. Why? Why not simply enforce the rules instead of making exceptions. The US has no market integrity due to fraud! GVRP had ONE share sold 138,000 times and brokers and MMs got their SEC friends to bail their butts out. Regulators allowed ONE share to be sold 138,000 times. That was criminal! Then they allow an ILLEGAL RS of 3M to 1 to occur and look the other way. Pretty clear where FRAUD exists in the market place now isnt it? Then the SEC and NASD want to talk about GVRP "generically" in terms of a reason to give them more power.
The daily list clearly shows
13:30 MODR Modern Energy Corporation Common Stock 10/19/2007 Reorganization (.001 sh of Modern Energy Corp New Common Stk & 100,000 restricted shs of Modern Energy Corp Preferred Stock, Class B) **
Posted by: jbones001
In reply to: None Date:10/18/2007 1:45:37 PM
Post #of 231102
Other-OTC System Changes - 10/18/2007
OTCBB Daily List
Other-OTC / Portal / PPS Daily List
SECURITY ADDITIONS
Updated Symbol Company Name Effective Date/Comments
13:30 AHCKF AMS Homecare Inc. Ordinary Shares (Canada) 10/19/2007 From BB (AHCKE) **
13:30 CTPIU Cit Group Inc New Corp Units 10/19/2007
13:30 CUTOF China Auto Electronics Group Ltd Ordinary shares (Bermuda) 10/19/2007
13:30 DBDJF Deutsche Bank DJ Eurostoxx 50 Dvg Shares hldgs (Germany) 10/19/2007
13:30 DTNHF Doutor Nichires Holdings Co Ltd Ordinary Shares (Japan) 10/19/2007
13:30 INIPF Infonic Plc London Ordinary shares (United Kingdom) 10/19/2007
13:30 MDNO Modern Energy Corporation Common Stock New 10/19/2007
SECURITY DELETIONS
Updated Symbol Company Name Effective Date/Comments
10:24 KMRLP Kimco Realty Corporation Dep Shares Repstg 1/100 preferred Cl G 10/18/2007 Listed on NYSE (KIM$G) **
13:30 AADPF Amstrad Plc Ordinary Shares 10/19/2007 Acquisition **
13:30 APEUF Apn European Retail Trust Units Partly Paid (Australia) 10/19/2007 Inactive security **
13:30 ASPB Aspen Racing Stables, Inc. Common Stock 10/19/2007 Added to OTCBB (ASPB) **
13:30 ATUMF Atrium Underwriting Ord Ordinary Shares 10/19/2007 Acquisition
13:30 CGUSF Chengdu Top Sci Tech Co Ltd Shs H (China) 10/19/2007 Inactive security **
13:30 CPQUF Companhia Petroquimica Do Sul Copesul Ordinary Shares 10/19/2007 Acquisition
13:30 CTRTF China Transcom Technologies Ltd Ordinary shares (Bermuda) 10/19/2007 Inactive security **
13:30 DIEYF Diamond Tree Energy Ltd Common Shares (Canada) 10/19/2007 Acquisition **
13:30 DOUCF Doutor Coffe Co Ordinary Shares 10/19/2007 Merger **
13:30 DUNM Dunn Mining Inc. Common Stock 10/19/2007 Added to OTCBB (DUNM) **
13:30 FMIPF Floreane Medical Implants Sa Ordinary Shares 10/19/2007 Acquisition **
13:30 FRWXF Frameworx Inc Shizuoka Ordinary Shares (Japan) 10/19/2007 Inactive security **
13:30 ISSRF Isis Resources Plc Adderbury Ordinary shares (United Kingdom) 10/19/2007 Inactive security **
13:30 LGCDF LG Card Company Ltd Ordinary Shares 10/19/2007 Acquisition **
13:30 LMGGF LionOre Mining International Ltd. Ordinary Shares (Canada) 10/19/2007 Acquisition **
13:30 MODR Modern Energy Corporation Common Stock 10/19/2007 Reorganization (.001 sh of Modern Energy Corp New Common Stk & 100,000 restricted shs of Modern Energy Corp Preferred Stock, Class B) **
13:30 MZTOF Marzotto & Figli Spa Ordinary Shares 10/19/2007 Acquisition **
13:30 QPCHF Qilu Petro Chemical Co Ltd Shares A (China) 10/19/2007 Inactive security **
13:30 SCEAF Shanghai Narcissus Elec - A Ordinary Shares 10/19/2007 Inactive security
13:30 SCERF Sceptre Income Unit (Canada) 10/19/2007 Merger **
13:30 SGDTF Sterlite Gold, Ltd. Ordinary Shares (Canada) 10/19/2007 Acquisition **
13:30 TCURF Trace Computers Plc Ordinary Shares 10/19/2007 Acquisition **
13:30 WTWR Watchtower, Inc. Common Stock 10/19/2007 Added to OTCBB (WTWR) **
13:30 XKOGF Xko Group Ordinary Shares 10/19/2007 Acquisition
13:30 YPCLF Yangzi Petrochemical Co Ltd Shares A (China) 10/19/2007 Inactive security **
13:30 YXGIF Yuxing Infotech Ordinary Shares 10/19/2007 Corporate Reorganization. See YUXIF.
SYMBOL CHANGES
Updated Date Old Symbol New Symbol Name Comment
13:30 10/19/2007 IXRFF PPIMF Passport Metals Inc Ordinary Shares (Canada) Refer to 10/18/2007 D/L. Symbol changed to reflect new name. **
NAME/SYMBOL CHANGES
Updated Date Old Symbol Old Name New Symbol New Name Comment
10:24 10/18/2007 IXRFF International X-Chequer Resources Inc Ordinary Shares (Canada) IXRFF Passport Metals Inc Ordinary Shares (Canada) **
13:30 10/19/2007 AIMS Aim Smart Corp Common Stock AIMR Aim Smart Corp New Common Stock 1-750 R/S **
13:30 10/19/2007 CACTF Contact Resources Ltd Ordinary shares (Australia) CACTF Contact Uranium Ltd Ordinary shares (Australia)
13:30 10/19/2007 CRLC Carlyle Golf, Inc. New Common Stock HDUP HeadsUp Entertainment International, Inc. Common Stock **
13:30 10/19/2007 CRPPF Corpora Plc Ordinary shares (United Kingdom) IFNCF Infonic PLC Ordinary shares (United Kingdom) **
13:30 10/19/2007 MRMT Monster Motors Inc MRMN Monster Motors Inc New Common Stock 1-60 R/S **
13:30 10/19/2007 NGAUF Niagra Mining Ltd Ordinary Shares (Australia) PSDNF Poseidon Nickel Ltd Ordinary Shares (Australia) **
13:30 10/19/2007 SGGFF Sonora Gold Corp Ordinary Shares (Canada) MQSTF MetalQuest Minerals Inc Ordinary Shares (Canada) 1-3 R/S **
Portal System Changes 10/18/2007
SECURITY ADDITIONS
Updated Symbol Company Name Effective Date/Comments
13:30 BBSBL Barclays Bk Plc Sh Ctf on Syndicate Bk 144A 10/24/2012 (United Kingdom) 10/19/2007
13:30 JPFTL J. P. Morgan International Derivatives Ltd. Indian Low Exercise Price Wt 144A 3C7 Finl Technologies India Ltd 10/08/2012 (Jersey) 10/19/2007
13:30 MGILY MORGAN STANLEY MS 144A Trigger Securities linked to GILD 10/19/2007
Private Placement Security Changes 10/18/2007
There are no entries for Private Placement Security issues.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
*********************************************************************
Anything I post is not a suggestion to buy or sell. Do your own DD. Please verify symbols and prices of any stocks I mention.
*******************************************************
I read the comlplaint from the 40s on down...I had not read it all when I posted a response a few hours ago. My opinion has changed in that MDNO did not send a notice to shareholders to vote on a RS, which is really what happened here(65), AND Scottrade rightfully declares the short transaction void because the RS was not properly authorized and should noy have been issued(66).
MDNO screwed up and as Scottrade implies, MDNO has hardly the $$$ available for a Civil suit.
It sucks, sorry people. I actually got a tip on this one when it was ".50" and I might have bought or not...I hate to see people lose money in situations like this.
Followers
|
8
|
Posters
|
|
Posts (Today)
|
0
|
Posts (Total)
|
394
|
Created
|
03/08/07
|
Type
|
Free
|
Moderators |
Modern Energy Corp
470 Nautilus St. Suite #304
La Jolla, CA 92037
Phone: 858.220.0243
Fax: 858.729.0271
http://www.modernenergycorp.com/
Modern Energy Corp trades on the third tier of the Frankfurt Stock Exchange as ME2C or ME2C.F. Modern Energy, established in 2006, is a development stage investment company with interests in Jatropha and Palm oils, mining and agricultural land in the Philippines, as well as investments in marketable securities. Now that the company has reorganized, its new management is beginning to execute on a business plan that is anticipated to generate increasing cash flow from aggressive initiatives involving its alternative energy properties.
The Company’s website at www.ModernEnergyCorp.com describes its work in the development of energy resources, presently focusing on development of Jatropha and palm oil production for bio-fuels from undeveloped plantations in the Philippines.
Modern Energy looks forward to becoming a leading company in the alternative energy field and continuing to develop other areas of sustainable energy, such as solar energy. Modern Energy is committed to environmental protection, advanced research in the alternative energy field, and harmony with the community.
Incorporated: 2006
Public Listing: 2007
Exchange Symbols: Frankfurt: ME2C
Common Shares issued & outstanding: 1,202,400,000
PALM OIL POTENTIAL (Biofuel)
Modern Energy's wholly owned subsidiaries are committed to producing bio-diesel through partnerships, joint ventures, leases, direct ownership and farming on more than 250,000 hectares (over 600,000 acres) of agricultural land on the island of Mindanao in the Philippines, much of which is suitable for growing palm oil and jatropha oil.
Palm trees are the most productive natural oil source in the world. A single hectare of oil palm may yield over 4 metric tons of crude oil, or nearly 5,000 liters (1200 gallons) of crude oil per hectare. Jatropha is the second most productive source at nearly 1000 gallons per hectare. (For comparison, soybeans and corn (maize), often heralded as top biofuel sources, generate only 118 and 45 gallons per hectare, respectively.)
If half of the Mindanao land were planted in jatropha plants and palm trees, in several years, after they mature, the company potentially could produce over US$200 million worth of palm and jatropha oil annually with current prices for palm and jatropha oil of US$400 per ton.
Biofuel is considered an eco-friendly source of energy, and reduces greenhouse gas emissions. Palm oil is an important source of biofuel because of its clean burning quality.
Sustainable practices and responsible methods of land clearance and cultivation could significantly reduce much of the unwanted impact on the environment. The land in the Philippines is not currently forested, but, after being planted with palm trees, the environment will benefit from the trees’ absorption of CO2 as it produces palm oil.
The company is currently negotiating with potential investors/partners that may invest in the potentially highly profitable and environmentally friendly palm oil and jatropha oil production enterprise.
MINING POTENTIAL
The Mindanao land in the Philippines also has access to mineral rights. There are potentially valuable quantities of copper, gold, silver, and other minerals. The company is assessing the property to determine which minerals are commercially viable for extraction in order to develop a business plan including attracting a well-capitalized partner.
Please visit www.ModernEnergyCorp.com for more information.
WHY INVEST IN MODERN ENERGY NOW?
Modern Energy Corporation (ME2C), was established in 2006 in Wyoming as a development stage investment company with interests in mining and agricultural land in the Philippines and holds investments in American marketable securities. ME2C is primarily oriented towards common and renewable energy resources. The company's activities presently focus on development of jatropha and palm oil production from plantations in the Philippines with future plans to develop its gold mining interests. ME2C is looking forward to becoming a leading company in the alternative energy field and to continuing to develop other areas of sustainable energy, such as solar energy. ME2C is committed to environmental protection, advanced research in the energy field and to harmony with the community. John F. Winnick, Sr. has just taken over the leadership of Modern Energy Corp now serving as Chairman and CEO |
Preachers Coffee Inc. Announces Joint Venture Agreement With Modern Energy Corp. With Preachers' Agricultural Development Interest in the Philippines
36,103 Acres Agricultural Property Interest of Preachers in the Philippines to Be Developed for Cultivation of Coffee and Jatropha Plants for Biodiesel Production
TAMPA, FL--(Marketwire - 09/08/09) - Preachers Coffee, Inc. (Pinksheets:PRCF - News) (Pinksheets:PCIO - News) and MODERN ENERGY CORP. (Pinksheets:MDRG - News) and (Frankfurt:ME2C - News) announced the signing of a Joint Venture Agreement on the Technical Management and Operating Contract of a 36,103 Acres of Agricultural and Forest Land which is under a Community-Based Forest Management Agreement (CBFMA) of the Government of the Philippines, in partnership with the Manobo Indigenous Community Cooperative on Mindanao island in the Philippines.
The Joint Venture Agreement has a 25 Year CBFMA Contract and an indefinite extension since it was appropriated in an Ancestral Domain Land Management for the Manobo Indigenous Communities. The Manobo Indigenous Communities has the Ancestral Domain Rights to the land and their Community Cooperative was for purposes of Agricultural and Forest Management to improve their living standard. The Joint Venture Technical Management and Operating Contract for the 36,103 acres will allow financial assistance and technical management to be provided by Preachers Coffee, Inc. and Modern Energy Corp.
Rubber trees for forest management, in addition to Coffee and Jatropha plants, are being prepared for planting in the agricultural areas.
The Jatropha plant is valued as a very cost effective feedstock for the production of oil used for producing Bio-Diesel. But unlike other biodiesel crops, Jatropha can be grown almost anywhere -- from arid land to more fertile farms like in the Phillipines. It doesn't need much water or fertilizer, although the yield rises as more water is available, like in Mindanao, Phillipines. And because the Jatropha is not edible, environmentalists and policy makers don't have to worry about whether Jatropha diverts resources away from crops that could be used to feed people. By some estimates, the per-barrel cost to produce Biofuel using Jatropha -- about $43 -- is about half that of corn and roughly one-third that of rapeseed, two other leading materials for alternative energy. At those prices, Jatropha Biodiesel would be competitive with fuel made from crude oil without significant government subsidies.
Recently, an airline had a test flight using a 50 jet fuel/50jatropha Biofuel mix. When Jatropha seeds are crushed, the resulting Jatropha oil can be processed to produce a high-quality biodiesel that can be used in a standard diesel car, while the residue, called "press cake," can also be processed and used as biomass feedstock to power electricity plants or used as fertilizer (it contains nitrogen, phosphorous and potassium).
A significant differentiator of Jatropha versus other Bio-Fuel Feedstocks is that Jatropha absorbs carbon-dioxide while they are growing, effectively canceling out the carbon dioxide they release when they burn. The plant may yield more than four times as much fuel per hectare of soybean, and more than ten times that of corn. A hectare of Jatropha has been claimed to produce 1,892 litrers of fuel. Once the Jatropha seeds are dried out and crushed, these poisonous seeds yield oil which can be burned in almost any diesel engine -- with no modification. Recent studies show that Jatropha seed produces between 30 and 40 percent of its mass in oil.
Nestor C. Buenaflor, Chairman and CEO of Preachers Coffee, Inc. (Pinksheets:PRCF - News) and its subsidiary (Pinksheets:PCIO - News), said that, "This Joint Venture Agreement with Modern Energy Corp. will provide an improvement for the Manobo Tribal Communities on Mindanao, Philippines. And the positive contribution represented by the cultivation of Jatropha plants introduced as one of the cash crops for the production of Bio-Diesel offers a stable and sustainable future for our companies and the Manobo Tribal Communities. We are not only cleaning the air because of responsible forest management and Bio-Diesel from Jatropha, but we also improve the lives of poor people in the remote areas of the world by providing them with job opportunities and income."
Chairman of Modern Energy, John Winnick, stated, "The Preachers Coffee, Inc. joint venture with 36,103 acres of prime agricultural land in the Philippines is just one example of the Global Vision of Green Energy from the Jatropha plant and cash crops such as coffee and rubber trees for rubber, to further expand Modern Energy's footprint to the nearly 1,000,000 acres that our company currently controls through our subsidiary, Sultan Saud Resource Development Corporation (SSRDC). Modern Energy is pursuing a change in business plan to focus on providing Bio-Diesel feedstock for the Asian Pacific Basin and developing the region's economies from a Third World nation to a world class provider of alternative clean energy. This green energy initiative will provide jobs and opportunity for growth on Mindanao, the eighth largest island population on earth, and showcase the best of environmental capitalism."
Volume | |
Day Range: | |
Bid Price | |
Ask Price | |
Last Trade Time: |