Spongetech Delivery Systems, Inc. (fka SPNGQ)

[Teflon2Insults]

First...SPNG is not a victim in this...it was a total fraud in all aspects...with no real intent to be a business, fraudulent reporting and so much more. NOT A VICTIM. Actually more the perpetrator, selling counterfeits of its own stock.

It and it's founders (who made it to be the funnel for a fraud, not a profitable operation) were the ones to gain from all the bad acts.

THAT IS AN ABSOLUTE...


And then...no: There is absolutely NO proof that there was what you claim.
It was given the courtesy of consideration and ...In fact, your position, by all that view it - is wrong and UNSUPPORTED. Oops.

Just like your well researched and informed decision to invest in SPNG by going "true long" was WRONG.

Sooner or later I guess that each and every point like that you make was denied, found faulty with support and any continued demands (no matter how one attempts to tilt it) about the findings are rightfully dismissed as the rantings of a disillusioned loser will be hopefully understood by you....and that any continuation of it will do nothing but confirming that last point.

[cowtown jay]

"...clear that the unregistered shares..." resulted in ill-gotten gain for the people who sold them. Right?

Where are the charges?

I'm waiting to see dozens of Relief Defendants named in this on-going case.

[cowtown jay]

There was plenty of proof that SpongeTech was victimized by significant and sustained violations of RegSHO. I named the brokerages who played a large part in that, in a document I submitted to the court.

Blue Sheet facts.

[Teflon2Insults]

Not just no proof that there was...
Fairly good proof there wasn't, and certainly clear that the unregistered shares and deceit overwhelm any that may have been.

Speculation and inuendo that what didn't happen could have....because it may have sometime with some service SPNG was also.

Speculation....that's what your doing going long on any stock....wild speculation on a penny...blind speculation in this case.

Surprised at the results?

[underdog150]

So, no proof that SPNG was naked shorted, just hope that would in turn keep
the Reg SHO story going.
Again, the numbers were skewed because SPNG lied about the true OS, and they would have never been on the list if the true OS was used in the calculation.
----------------------------
I could have given you a definitive answer if Apex hadn't obstructed my investigation by telling me that they had no responsibility for providing Penson's Blue Sheets to me, when I tried to subpoena those records from them. I will note, however, that Apex was subsequently fined for having FTD's stemming from their assumption of Penson's contracts.

[cowtown jay]

I could have given you a definitive answer if Apex hadn't obstructed my investigation by telling me that they had no responsibility for providing Penson's Blue Sheets to me, when I tried to subpoena those records from them. I will note, however, that Apex was subsequently fined for having FTD's stemming from their assumption of Penson's contracts.

[underdog150]

Naked shorting SPNG shares?
-----------------
She failed to note, however, that the company's primary clearing firm, as well as the Exchange, were BOTH charged with naked shorting violations.

[cowtown jay]

I haven't seen any evidence that there was even one Failure, caused by even one clearing firm, that refused to clear even one sale.

Nor has there been even one charge, filed by even one US Regulator, for this breach of fiduciary duty. At least, not one charge that specifically mentioned SpongeTech investors as victims.

[Teflon2Insults]

Cow GETS all the Protection of the Law...DEMANDS MORE!
Wants it to just work for him.

As noted and accepted by parties with actual names and reputations and a disinterest but responsibility, and documented, and if nothing else passes the smell test as reasonable - it ain't that hard to see what happened....
Not that difficult to grasp....

And it ain't the things Jay claims (based on his reading and belief in some "bocca lawyer" - and certainly doesn't require any more discovery or "fill in the blanks as I think that indicates..." type logic to get to.

So- from what he's been yelping about - his plan to make a killing in a "short squeeze" was just a bad investment. (His idea of starting one now totally absurd ...even if there was open shorts (who would want to cash out at this valueless stock rather than pay the margin to maintain it), but can't be forced to ever close their position (in this case a position in stock that there are oodles of sitting in coffers that almost anyone would take anything for just to get off their report anyway), etc., etc., A short squeeze requires the short position to be the wrong decision.

If you go long and the stock goes up you win...good decision. Down, you lose, bad decision. If you go short and it goes up, bad decision. Down, good decision. Which fits this case?

The reason the stock goes up or down is unimportant...(bad business, bad management, fraudulent management, cooked books, theft by others, unfair trade against it, malfeasance of ----whatever...), the owners take the responsibility for all of that.

If the company is successful or not is important.
The company was not successful.

But at the end of the day he gets the protection of the law...FULLY:
He was a stockholder in a company that filed Bankruptcy. Stockholders are protected - and were in this case - to ONLY LOSING AS MUCH AS THEY HAD INVESTED. Yup...you don't have to pay for all the misdeeds, failed obligations, supplier/creditor losses of your company. He gets off scott free! That is what the company you invested in (and according to you, some of whose stock you controlled when it happened) did.

If there is any value to the stock of the company (and stop right there...NO there isn't (and I guess you knew this when planning on a short squeeze based on your assumption of large NSS demons at play - and instead maybe bought a forever/wherever worthless counterfeit)....all that value would first go to all those who are letting you off the hook for your business failures and costs. (In a better view...it actually isn't yours to sell. it is forfeited to those who let you off the hook).

Just consider: If this was (generally)something other than a C corp (say just you and friends Metter & Moskie and Pilond and PIKE)....the owners would be entirely responsible for all the breaches and obligations - heck even the illegal acts ----of the organization.

You should be very thankful....I mean you could be responsible to send Unkie Norm his outstanding payments for the last few car loads he bought.

Sure - seek recovery from criminals (for the loss they caused)....but get off this idea that any owner/investor in SPNG would have any value coming from being an owner of the company.

[shajandr]

Here are all the hard facts one needs to know:

When one buys stock in an obvious SCAM that was blatantly obvious to anyone doing even just the most rudimentary DD and/or reading the iHub SPNG board at the time, and hoping to find a GREATER FOOL to flip the shares in the worthless SCAM shell SPNG, and when the SEC, FINRA, and/or DTCC stop the music and one is left with the hot potato and no chair to sit in, then the ONLY persons one can legitimately blame for their LOSS are:

(1) Mike Metter and Steven Moskowitz, and

(2) the person in the mirror who bought an obvious scam hoping to flip it to a bigger sucker buy gott caught when the music stopped.

THAT'S IT!

And that's the ONLY parties who are responsible for the LOSSES suffered by the speculator who bought an OBVIOUS SCAM hoping to flip the worthless SCAM shares to others.

No short sellers cost such buyers who did not sell before the trading halt even a penny. Nothing. Zero damages.

It is EXACTLY that simple. If one didn't sell before the halt and freeze, they have ZERO basis to claim any short seller did ANY damage to them.

[shajandr]

Dude, some or even many of the FTDs were SALES made by the distribution network that didn't clear because the clearing firm refused the fake Moskowitz shares.

Some clearing firms DID accept them, and many of THOSE shares are now in many, many people's accounts. Some of them gott stuck with illegally delegended shares which their brokerage's inbound clearing firm wrongly cleared and transferred to the brokerage (and are held in street name butt owned by the account holders) and THEN various clearing firms would nott clear sales from these accounts into the brokerage(s) of new buyers - so the old buyers were stuck, having made a sale butt without legit shares to deliver (since the new buyer's inbound clearing firm would nott clear the shares for transfer to the new buyer's brokerage).

Thus the FTDs. Nott that difficult to grok.

As word gott ~OUTT, more and more clearing firms refused to clear SPNG share transfers and when the SEC and FINRA became aware that there were illegally delegended shares in the market, ALL SPNG shares became of questionable authenticity because it's virtually impossible to track the lineage of each individual share which comes into and leaves a brokerage's street (house) account. So the SEC shut SPNG down by suspension and the DTCC froze further transactions in SPNG.

Really nott that complicated.

[cowtown jay]

Most of the shares issued by the company were sold to members of the SpongeTech stock distribution network. These weren't "one and done" transactions. These stock beneficiaries each received numerous distributions. It seems that if they were not getting delivery of their shares, they would have quit buying additional shares. Also, if delivery had not been made, they could not have re-sold the shares, which they all did.

[cowtown jay]

I addressed this point previously. But here it is again.

"The Boca securities lawyer noted that the Threshold List was skewed by SpongeTech's under-reporting of Outstanding Shares. She failed to note, however, that the company's primary clearing firm, as well as the Exchange, were BOTH charged with naked shorting violations. This, too, would skew the number of Outstanding Shares, but in the opposite direction.

Nor did the Boca securities lawyer note the Enforcement Action of Regulators such as the Investment Industry Regulatory Organization of Canada. They reported shares sold to the public that were obtained at a 900% discount to the market price."

The TA's count of Outstanding Shares should reconcile with the number of shares held in certificate form, plus the NOBO and OBO list of shareholders. Without that listing, there is no proof of the true number of Outstanding Shares, in my opinion. If the precise number of shares is known, then the precise number and identity of shareholders should be easy to determine, with minimal additional information.

[shajandr]

Exactly so! This is an easier way to unnerstan it.

LOL! Of course, because the shares Moskowitz and Metter had planned to deliver as UNRESTRICTED shares for delivery were illegal and could nott be delivered to the buyers - because that would be fraud.

There were ILLEGAL unregistered shares in the FLOAT!

So because some clearing entities were refusing to accept the Mosky bogus shares, the trades couldn't clear. Some brokerages wound up having made sales for clients who had SPNG shares in their accounts which were nott being accepted by the clearing entities in many cases because the clearing agents didn't believe the documentation on those shares that claimed they were free-trading - like the Bomart letters among other suspicious documentation. Thus trades were made with shares that the clearing agents refused to accept as deliveries for the trades. Ergo, FTDs!

It's nott hard to unnerstan whut happened.

[underdog150]

Jay, SPNG was on the RegSHO Security Threshold List because they were lying about the current outstanding shares at the time. Stocks listed on RegSHO are based on a percentage of fails using the known outstanding shares on any given day. Since SPNG lied in their filings about the current OS, all fails were based on a bogus OS they claimed that should have been much higher. If the threshold was based on the true number of shares outstanding, SPNG would have never made the list.

-------------------
We had Failures to Deliver everyday, for weeks, resulting in the company being placed on the RegSHO Security Threshold List. That's a fact. It's not a crackpot theory.

[Teflon2Insults]

Yes, it's arguments always come down to he shouldn't bear the loss for his poor investing....and others are to blame for it.

Apparently his understanding of the law is - it protects him so he can't ;ose (or is it only make) money on his investments....

Or maybe it's just because others did something wrong (and the specific things and people he points to are questionable at most) then he should not only be allowed to, but the law should force it. Force other people to buy his worthless stock, but for some reason....for a lot of value!

But clearly - it will all be proven his way - as he was so sure of before - SOON!

Huge sales
Destiny
Can't be a fraud
Warren Buffet, Deloitte, well everybody coming in.
Owns the Sponge Bob rights...everywhere...Europe alone worth millions
Pike, Pike, Pike.....


So much more - all totally false...negligently so.
Like his current proclmations.

[Teflon2Insults]

Yes, it's arguments always come down to he shouldn't bear the loss for his poor investing....and others are to blame for it.

Apparently his understanding of the law is - it protects him so he can't ;ose (or is it only make) money on his investments....

Or maybe it's just because others did something wrong (and the specific things and people he points to are questionable at most) then he should not only be allowed to, but the law should force it. Force other people to buy his worthless stock, but for some reason....for a lot of value!

But clearly - it will all be proven his way - as he was so sure of before - SOON!

Huge sales
Destiny
Can't be a fraud
Warren Buffet, Deloitte, well everybody coming in.
Owns the Sponge Bob rights...everywhere...Europe alone worth millions
Pike, Pike, Pike.....


So much more - all totally false...negligently so.
Like his current proclmations.

[puppydotcom]

Yup, and its Not
I want to hold your hand ....
-Beatles

[k9narc]

When it comes to SPNG, Roy is right, but The Ink Spots hit it spot on........... "It's All Over But The Crying "

[scion]

It's Over...
-Roy Orbison

[shajandr]

"What about the fraud perpetrated upon SpongeTech shareholders who paid for shares that can't be authenticated and certificated?"

Go see Moskowitz. He was the source of the illegally unrestricted shares that flooded the market.

Second, no harm was done to the shareholder by any short. The shareholders bought worthless shares in a SCAM. The shares, both the legal and the illegal, were ALL worthless.

And furthermore, your shares, even if borrowed and nott replaced (of which there is no evidence, were never sold by you - you suffered NO HARM.

Shares in an OBVIOUS SCAM were worthless in street name, in certificated form, or any other form.

Oh, and what's tha value of a certificated SPNG share? Is it a hot eBay item now as a collectors' item???

Besides, your posts asked to be able to TRADE the shares - a FINRA/SEC/DTCC 'release' or somesuch thing. That has nothing to do with certificates - they aren't preventing getting certificates - the TA does that alone.

Sheesh, that is a really bizarre argument.

[puppydotcom]

Jay, the fact is - there were many people posting on the board who were heavy in DD on this scam. There was NO WAY this company could or would do anything near what the con artist were spewing out in phone calls and PR's to shareholders and the public.

The red flags were flying - the lies were piling up -

People who believed in that crap and ignored all the facts and the real issues - are now suffering from the belief. No such thing as a free lunch .. in scammy penny land

I know there were teams working the boards trying to drown out the naysayers and people with different opinions of this scam

People seemed to have soap in their eyes and greed running as blood

It's over now. Everyone's money is gone - most likely the crooks will not pay much or anything toward the monetary judgements to shareholders

[236T568]

huh?

According to the SEC, after spending 1 1/2 years investigating SPNG and reviewing the data, there was never a significant naked short position in criminal enterprise SPNG, so how can you claim that Penson was very short the stock, enough to cause a short squeeze?

Penson Financial, our primary clearing firm, that was subsequently charged with naked shorting, would have had huge financial exposure in the event that a short squeeze was triggered, given the existence of reported Fails to Deliver.

[cowtown jay]

As I recall, a few weeks after I wrote that post, the company said that they expected to be looking at $1.25 in EPS, which is exactly what I projected.

As stated, I also assumed that the 1:100 Reverse Split would proceed. What was then observed was that the bid was steadily maintained in the four cent range for months, until sometime after the Christmas Eve Wells Notices were issued. Nonetheless, a four cent bid for a period of months would have equated to a $4.00 share price after a Reverse Split, and that would have met Nasdaq listing requirements.

The documentation we reviewed under Court Order also revealed some evidence of a tender offer, or two, as I reported to the Court.

The initial Bankruptcy Trustee did receive the required financial data, according to his Final Report, and according to statements made by Moskowitz. None of the information, which should have included shareholder data, was submitted to the Court by the Trustee, who evidently did not have it reviewed by an auditor.

Penson Financial, our primary clearing firm, that was subsequently charged with naked shorting, would have had huge financial exposure in the event that a short squeeze was triggered, given the existence of reported Fails to Deliver. For Penson, who was also registered to transact government securities, to fail as a result of their exposure to a short squeeze, would have had substantial repurcussions to the American market, as the SEC later said.

An EPS of $1.25, prior to a Reverse Split, would have paled in comparison to a spike in share price, due to a short squeeze, as we recently saw in KBIO. I firmly believe that we should have seen such a short squeeze in SPNG, as well.

[puppydotcom]

LOL.. I remember that

[cowtown jay]

"It is asking to be able to defraud someone (the party that would buy the worthless shares) by taking money from them in exchange for something that is known to be entirely worthless - shares in a defunct corporation." What about money taken from shareholders for shares that were never delivered?

What about the fraud perpetrated upon SpongeTech shareholders who paid for shares that can't be authenticated and certificated?

What about the SEC's failure to enforce an open market buy-in to cure Failures to Deliver and, instead, suspended trading? The exact opposite of enforcing buy-ins, as RegSHO requires?

An open market buy-in, in accordance with RegSHO, is the law. Why shouldn't shareholders want to be able to sell shares in an enforced buy-in? Why shouldn't shareholders receive the full protection of the law?

[Teflon2Insults]

I disagree.....with the info like that....and the well published Qs about the product and every other claim...an informed serious investor would probably day trade up and or short all the way!

The one thing by having any of the above someone, even not a trained experienced expert but just using common sense wouldn't do: "True Long".

[shajandr]

"US Government as a Special Investigator"

Very basic DD shows and would have shown in 2007 or before that both the CEO (Metter) and the CFO (Moskowitz) both had long histories of defunct companies, SEC problems, broker license problems, tax fraud issues, securities fraud claims, and a history of making false submissions to a court (Moskowitz's made-up letters from Flo Weinberg and another person - that the NY Tax Court rejected as fake and stated so in the court opinion rejecting Moskowitz's claimed defenses for tax fraud.

Of course ANYONE doing basic DD would have uncovered those facts from a very simple internet search and never invested a dime in the very OBVIOUS fraud that SPNG was.

[shajandr]

Asking to be able to dump knowingly worthless shares in a defunct corporation that has been LIQUIDATED under Chapter 7 and, as corporate bankruptcy law requires, the existing debts, claims, and liabilities of a LIQUIDATED corporation are never discharged - they continue against the empty corporate corpse which is not current in corporate filings and is defunct - is asking to be allowed to COMMIT FRAUD.

A stated desire for SEC/FINRA/DTCC to allow one to SELL shares in a corporation that is valueless and is defunct. THAT WOULD CONSTITUTE FRAUD. It is asking to be able to defraud someone (the party that would buy the worthless shares) by taking money from them in exchange for something that is known to be entirely worthless - shares in a defunct corporation. That would be a CRIMINAL ACT and in my opinion, such a stated desire to commit fraud is despicable in itself.

The post really helps to clarify why the Federal government is so entirely inept and useless, from hiring people who, despite being given over a BILLION Dollars cannot create a simple website and gett it to work properly, like the Obamacare Federal-produced exchange website, to the inability of the DoD, DoState, and USAID to account for over $37 BILLION Dollars in Afghanistan alone.

Clearly, the Federal government is filled with incompetent employees and CONtractors. Your post clearly proves that FACT beyond any shadow of a doubt.

[236T568]

It appears that there are now some "people" interested in how this government agent has been profiting from the pump and dump of this criminal enterprise. I really don't think that it is going to end well for him.

Hard to tell as he flip flops on things more than any government person ever seen - but I think his position has been it was his advanced insight that made it so he always understood what SPNG was (a stock fraud, fronted by an essentially fake company with an advertising department), just he wouldn't get caught holding an empty bag.


I guess that's why he says he bought low and sold higher several times.
I guess, as he is an expert (and hence can't be expected to make a wrong investment choice), he felt that even after the publicity at all sites, the SEC actions, the stops and notices, etc, there was more time (although it would have to be soon) to go short and collect that way too.

His ace in the hole.....his years of high level enforcement actions on things like this he knew he could use to get reimbursement from others for making several good ones followed by one bad investment decision.

[Teflon2Insults]

Hard to tell as he flip flops on things more than any government person ever seen - but I think his position has been it was his advanced insight that made it so he always understood what SPNG was (a stock fraud, fronted by an essentially fake company with an advertising department), just he wouldn't get caught holding an empty bag.


I guess that's why he says he bought low and sold higher several times.
I guess, as he is an expert (and hence can't be expected to make a wrong investment choice), he felt that even after the publicity at all sites, the SEC actions, the stops and notices, etc, there was more time (although it would have to be soon) to go short and collect that way too.

His ace in the hole.....his years of high level enforcement actions on things like this he knew he could use to get reimbursement from others for making several good ones followed by one bad investment decision.

[MorningLightMountain]

I'm looking for $125 per share.

I think that's a little cheap, too. It assumes FY10 earnings of $42m, divided up into 5m shares ($8.40 EPS), with a PE of only 15.

When do I hope to sell? Well, if we:

a. get the 10k results, and
b. proceed with the reverse split, and
c. announce a buyout, and
d. trigger a squeeze

I would be willing to part with my shares today, on a pre-split basis.

Thanks in advance, Steve and Mike.

[puppydotcom]

US Government as a Special Investigator, and I also registered with the National Futures Association at my brokerage's request

Holly cow!

I am shocked you could not have figured this out to be a scam from the start. There were MANY of us from the start who DAILY posted the facts about this pump and dump from the very start .. and guess what we were called

Oh wait let me tell you

Mr Shorty

and now the shareholders have paid for their ignorance and greed

[cowtown jay]

There's a phrase for when a "group of people who have been treated badly for a long time suddenly become forceful and stop accepting a difficult situation:"

"the worm turns."

http://dictionary.cambridge.org/us/dictionary/english/the-worm-turns

It's time Citizen Shareholders are extended the full protection of securities laws, and refuse to sacrifice that right to the whim of the SEC.

[236T568]

Oh my, a Government agent working for a brokerage firm pumping and hyping a criminal enterprise (SPNG) to get innocent investors to buy the stock while at the same time selling the stock into the market...

isn't going to look too good for you at the end of the day

not good at all

As I said, "I am chomping at the bit to get into it..." And that's after having spent six years pushing this already. Does that sound like I'm worried about becoming the Number One relief defendant in a criminal proceeding?

The only problem I could see, since it is public record that I have worked for the US Government as a Special Investigator, and that I also registered with the National Futures Association at my brokerage's request, is that unfounded allegations of criminal conduct could affect my security clearance with the government, or re-registration with the NFA, should I decide to do additional contracting in the future.

[cowtown jay]

As I said, "I am chomping at the bit to get into it..." And that's after having spent six years pushing this already. Does that sound like I'm worried about becoming the Number One relief defendant in a criminal proceeding?

The only problem I could see, since it is public record that I have worked for the US Government as a Special Investigator, and that I also registered with the National Futures Association at my brokerage's request, is that unfounded allegations of criminal conduct could affect my security clearance with the government, or re-registration with the NFA, should I decide to do additional contracting in the future.

[cowtown jay]

There's no point in pursuing additional information when the criminal case remains open for further proceedings.

[236T568]

You do understand, don't you, that if this is the case, that YOU will be one of the first half dozen or so relief defendants named.

Secondly, this case remains open for further proceedings. I expect these further proceedings to result in charging dozens of Relief Defendants in this case. So it's a "wait and see" situation. Fine by me, as long as justice is served to SpongeTech shareholders.

[cowtown jay]

"And why again is it that with all the money at stake - NO ONE - other than you wants to pursue the route you want to pursue?"

That's a fair question, and one of my favorite interests in this case. So much so, that I am chomping at the bit to get into it, if necessary. It will be very time consuming, and a lot of work. But if shareholders don't get the justice we deserve in this case, then I will start the work I reference here.

Suffice it to say two things. First, I have duly noted subsequent related litigation that demonstrated responsible protection of shareholders during the investigation of these cases.

Secondly, this case remains open for further proceedings. I expect these further proceedings to result in charging dozens of Relief Defendants in this case. So it's a "wait and see" situation. Fine by me, as long as justice is served to SpongeTech shareholders.

[cowtown jay]

"LOL! Of course, because the shares Moskowitz and Metter had planned to deliver as UNRESTRICTED shares for delivery were illegal and could nott be delivered to the buyers - because that would be fraud.

There were ILLEGAL unregistered shares in the FLOAT!"

My Dec 2011 Report of Examination noted the following:

"Pensley's Objection claimed that shares were being diverted to a close corporation. As I recall the SEC Complaint documentation, it referred to both Diomede and Maremmano as close corporations. These companies, according to the WST Transaction Journal, share the same Panama City address as do Ardee Trading Company and Fribourg Enterprises, at 10 Elvira Mendez Street."

Based on my selection of your comments and my comments, it may not seem like it, but we are actually referencing the same thing. And there is Regulatory substantiation that supports what we say, to include charges having been filed.

[shajandr]

LOL! Of course, because the shares Moskowitz and Metter had planned to deliver as UNRESTRICTED shares for delivery were illegal and could nott be delivered to the buyers - because that would be fraud.

There were ILLEGAL unregistered shares in the FLOAT!

So because the clearing entities were refusing to accept the Mosky bogus shares, the trades couldn't clear. Some brokerages wound up having made sales for clients who had SPNG shares in their accounts which were nott being accepted by the clearing entities in many cases because the clearing agents didn't believe the documentation on those shares that claimed they were free-trading - like the Bomart letters among other suspicious documentation. Thus trades were made with shares that the clearing agents refused to accept as deliveries for the trades. Ergo, FTDs!

It's nott hard.

Your theories are both crackpot AND incomprehensible NONSENSE. Which is why your letters to the court are all circular filed in the "Crackpot Pennystock Fraud Theory" dumpster.

So yapping on iHub isn't gonna do a damned thing.

YOU think your crackpot theory has merit, then go DO SOMETHING by filing a Krazy Al Hodges-style or Bill Frizell-style lawsuit (and the appeal when it getts kicked to the curb of dismissal by the judge on opening motions).

Nobody here gives a damn about these crackpot theories.

Go DO SOMETHING. Show us we're all wrong about your crackpot theories by going to court and PROVING a claim.

Until then, it's a straight-up waste of everybody's time.

Nobody gives a shit about your handwaving theories.

[cowtown jay]

We had Failures to Deliver everyday, for weeks, resulting in the company being placed on the RegSHO Security Threshold List. That's a fact. It's not a crackpot theory.

We had billions of unregistered shares illegally sold to the investing public through a well-defined stock distribution ring, according to the SEC's (not unicorns') charges. That's also a fact.

[shajandr]

"But, I care, even if I am the only one that does."

You are the only one.

Crackpot theories are uninteresting.

If you want to chase windmills, then GO DO IT. Posting about it here and elsewhere on iHub isn't gonna do anything.

One, because it's a crackpot theory that's been floated in virtually every pennyscam once they've collapsed.

Two, because there is no EVIDENCE to back up the nonsensical theories.

Third, because of (1) and (2), and for many additional reasons, because nobody gives a shit. If you do, then go gett it yourself.

Nobody else cares about the unicorn theories and the other nonsense.


So there's that.

Good luck - follow Krazy Al Hodges' and Bill Frizell's (from CMKX) footsteps to the court circular file. It's a big waste container with lots of very similar UNSUBSTANTIATED bogus claims made and placed in the huge rubbish container labeled "Pennyscam Fraud Victims Crackpot Theories". Right behind every courthouse.

[cowtown jay]

"Nobody else cares about the unicorn theories and the other nonsense." That includes me.

What I DO care about is seeing that SpongeTech shareholders are extended the full protection of the law.

We had Failures to Deliver everyday, for weeks, resulting in the company being placed on the RegSHO Security Threshold List. That's a fact.

We had billions of unregistered shares illegally sold to the investing public through a well-defined stock distribution ring, according to the SEC's charges. That's also a fact.

You have said those facts are irrelevant, and that nobody cares. I get that.

But, I care, even if I am the only one that does.

[shajandr]

I offer the following retort:

shajandr Saturday, 02/27/16 11:57:40 PM
Re: cowtown jay post# 345864
Post # of 345905

Prolly because nobody gives a shit. If you do, then go gett it yourself.

Nobody else cares about the unicorn theories and the other nonsense.

Especially the court which has circular filed (shtcanned) all of your useless nonsensical letters.

Maybe Krazy Al Hodges or Bill Frizell (lawyers who bilked $$$ from CMKX shareholders for YEARS chasing the fictional NSS and every single court action was dismissed - and the appeals denied - because it's all based on bullshet - the "NSS predatory unicorns took my munny" baloney.

Butt really, nobody gives a rip about handwaving and unsubstantiated claims with no evidence or proof - nor even a logical, coherent argument - about the fever dreaming of the NSS unicorns.

You bought shares in a WORTHLESS SCAM. Live with your mistake. It's nott gonna change. To the extent that there are ANY uncovered short positions - GOOD FOR THEM - they were RIGHT, you were WRONG. Money should go to the people who are RIGHT at assessing business value - and uncovering WORTHLESS SCAMS like SPNG. Munny should NOTT go to people who cannot take care of it and invest it in REAL, profitable companies that grow capital - nott SCAMS.

It is a social good that munny flows from the hands of the foolish to the hands of those who make wiser investments that actually produce sustainable jobs and grow productive capital.

The short sellers in SPNG (if ANY still exist) were RIGHT. They deserve to be rewarded for being RIGHT. Those who bought into this OBVIOUS SCAM were WRONG and should nott be relieved of their own mistakes.

[236T568]

actually, wrong

YOU purchased shares that were fraudulent registered then YOU sold them into the market at a profit while pumping the stock with false and misleading information about criminal enterprise SPNG.

It's not a matter of my wanting to sell my shares, but wanting others prosecuted for selling theirs'. I didn't sell unregistered shares that I received from the company at a substantial discount.

[alien42]

Charge those who benefited from ill-gotten gain, and return that money to injured investors.

those would include you.

[cowtown jay]

I want to see RegSHO enforced. I want to see the open market buy-in of shares that were not delivered to the buyers, and I want to sell my shares, at the highest possible price, in that process. I want the protection of the law, as every shareholder is entitled to have. The SEC's trading suspension denies shareholders the protection of the SEC's own RegSHO.

In addition, if unregistered shares were sold to the public, as the SEC has charged, I want the protection of the law in that regard, also. Charge those who benefited from ill-gotten gain, and return that money to injured investors.

It's not a matter of my wanting to sell my shares, but wanting others prosecuted for selling theirs'. I didn't sell unregistered shares that I received from the company at a substantial discount.

[Teflon2Insults]

Oh....you mean in an article or 2 years ago and just like the many, many they print every day?

Actually, in the real world....the non-delusional one different than you live in, no one really cares enough about you.

Oh...the newspaper didn't really like anything...it has no actual feelings...it is inert. The writer...well what he wrote was just another job for him. One of several he had that week...and hundreds before and since.

It works well for you actually...just like all the other members of the Criminal SPNG distribution network of fraudsters.....all is forgotten and the new take it's place, Your old news.

Time for a new scam.....although I'm thinking SPNG by time and all was just a bit on the lucky side. Now it won't be quite as succesfull. But still profitable!

[cowtown jay]

I'M number ONE!! I'M number ONE!!

I like the way that sounds, 236. And if your guess is right, that I'll be "first in line to be added as a new defendant in the criminal securities fraud case," then I will be rightfully entitled to claim being number ONE.

The NY Post really liked writing about SpongeTech. You know anyone who could scoop them as to my imminent designation as being the number one defendant in upcoming SpongeTech litigation?