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.
Borrowed from Renee. Thanks Renee !!!
U.S. SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
http://www.sec.gov/litigation/litreleases/2014/lr22928.htm
Connecticut-Based Stock Promoter Ordered to Pay Over $9.6 Million in Stock Touting and Scalping Scheme
The Securities and Exchange Commission announced today that on February 12, 2014, a Connecticut federal court entered judgments against a former Connecticut-based stock promoter, Jerry S. Williams, and two companies that he controlled, Monk's Den, LLC and First In Awareness, LLC, who are defendants in a Commission enforcement action filed in 2012 alleging that they operated a fraudulent Internet-based stock touting and scalping scheme. The judgments order the defendants to pay a total of over $9.6 million.
Williams, Monk's Den, and First In Awareness were defendants in a civil fraud action filed by the Commission on July 20, 2012. The Commission's complaint alleged that from 2009 through 2010, Williams recommended two stocks, Cascadia Investments, Inc. and Green Oasis, Inc., to a large group of followers who followed his trading recommendations and strategies. Williams, who was known to his followers as "Monk," used his internet-based message board - called Monk's Den - as well as his in-person seminars (called "Monkinars"), and other means, to encourage people to buy, hold, and accumulate Cascadia and Green Oasis stock. In particular, Williams told his followers that by buying up the outstanding shares, or float, of these companies, they could collectively trigger a "short squeeze" that would allow them to sell their stock to "market makers" that had shorted the stock. Williams falsely stated that he had previously used this "Float Lock Down" strategy successfully to make himself and his followers enormous profits. In fact, unknown to his followers, Williams had been hired by Cascadia and Green Oasis to promote their stock and had been compensated with millions of free and discounted shares of these stocks. Williams secretly sold millions of Cascadia and Green Oasis shares at the same time he was encouraging potential investors to buy, hold and accumulate these stocks. Williams made profits of over $2.3 million from his scheme.
Without admitting or denying the allegations in the Commission's complaint, Williams, First In Awareness and Monk's Den consented to final judgments enjoining them from violating Section 10(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and Rule 10b-5 thereunder, and as to Williams only, enjoining him from violating Sections 17(a) and 17(b) of the Securities Act of 1933 and Sections 206(1) and 206(2) of the Investment Advisers Act of 1940. The final judgments found Williams, Monk's Den, and First In Awareness jointly and severally liable for disgorgement of $2,357,208 in ill-gotten gains plus prejudgment interest of $188,766, ordered each to pay a civil penalty of $2,357,208, and imposed a penny stock bar on Williams.
For additional information, see Litigation Release No. 22420 (July 23, 2012). http://www.sec.gov/litigation/litreleases/2012/lr22420
Anyone think there are any more Monks running around out there?
And yes, to answer your question that I am in real life. ROL!
What you are posting here is not what was posted on the NBRI board. Your post here has been edited....post the original e-mail from Mr. Leopold...thanks!
Good point lemon, what matters is how good is the proof? An ethical poster will admit his mistakes when HE is convinced he's been PROVEN wrong.
If it's not pointed out to him he will likely not even notice.
We all make mistakes. First he has to remember saying it.
What makes you think you have the real facts that proves the poster wrong? How ethical is the source that provided you with the "facts"
Were you actually able to verify that Hundley Associates is unrelated to DayStar Properties?
Melvin, ex employee of Hotel PURE is now an assistant to Pat Hundley, at least that is what his bio says.
It's a real doozy.
Hey malc, I haven't had a chance to contact anyone yet. I'll have to wait until this weekend to look into it. Keep the OTHM board updated of your findings!
Bruce you forgot to mention that Mr. Leopold has paid himself less in those 6 years than the average 7 Eleven manager has made over that time frame. Instead takes the majority of his income in shares which he has made but 1 small sell in those 6 years?
But when he mentions his properties hold possible billions in potential PM he is satan stealing kids lunch money?
The link to the old promotion was not the primary point. It was that NBRI does not show up on an internet search for this board<<<<<<<<<I think you are being pretty dishonest for someone who is supposedly so ethical..Why post a 3 year old link except to "try" and hurt the CEO's reputation? Are you implying the CEO is a serial diluter? The O/S is 140 million for SIX years of operation with much underlying value..Is the O/S excessive in your opinion? And you know NBRI DOES show up on an IHUB search and in not such a flattering light and from YOUR keyboard..You deny it? But why is NBRI even mentioned? It should only be mentioned on this board as an example of acceptable and proper behavior of a CEO..Out of all the scams and near scams..Diluters..CEO's and "Board members" that make a living off shareholders..Repeat R/S offenders ETC..Why such high standards and focus on NBRI, a REAL company?
The link to the old promotion was not the primary point. It was that NBRI does not show up on an internet search for this board, which did not discuss NBRI hardly at all until y'all brought it up in specific.
And being as this board is intended to focus on the Ethics and Philosophy of stock trading or investing, I was more wondering in specific how saying one thing in public and doing the opposite in reality fits into the equation.
Reminder: Please attempt to adhere to board policy.
Agree 100% DeeDog.
I like to think I have become a neutral poster, neither bashing or pumping, only stating my honest opinion...be it good or bad in the eyes of the chronic pumpers.
It's true that we learn from experience. I had to lose my tail more than once before I learned two basics. I set a limit on the amount I gamble with on penny stocks and I don't believe what I read on message boards, with few exceptions. It's only opinions and usually exaggerated.
I use PM's when I spot a newbie who says he just put his daughter's entire college fund on a penny stock. These people need a word of warning after they have been snowed into thinking they found the "investment" of a life time.
No such thing as long term investment in OTC stocks.
True that this happens, but can be controlled to a degree by posters keeping their posts on topic. If too many posts get reinstated by Admin they will admonish or remove the mod who is deleting on-topic posts he disagrees with.
As a mod I find it frustrating at times when someone will post blatant lies and I can't delete it, and they continue to do this even after being corrected with facts. Being untruthful doesn't make them off topic. People can say anything they want, as long as it is about the company and not a personal attack.
I haven't noticed the yellow stars, I'll watch for it.
LOL! ethics?? Have you forgotten about the CEO's claim to doing mind altering drugs....oh yeah, and a guidebook on how to work around the stock market.
Aug 4, 2011<<<<That may have been interesting when it came out almost 3 years ago but whats it got to do with anything?
What's all this talk about about choking is this an ethics board or are in an S and M dungeon lol. Anyways I plan on shorting CMG this next month and riding out my VRNG until 6.,short term target on chipotle is 465
Good night Malc,
I follow this board because I found it interesting. Even if we didn't disagree about certain stocks I prolly would still follow it.
Every post I brought up NBRI was a response to a post that you had discussed it.
If NBRI dropped from all time highs when gold dropped for reasons other than the POG why did every other miner the world drop equally?
That right the GDXJ is down 80% from the day NBRI was at .22 which is also down 80%.
How does that make sense with your post?
Today gold dropped to 1233, but no matter. This board was created to discuss the Ethics and Philosophy of the underbelly of the stock world, not NBRI in specific.
Please feel free to discuss NBRI until the cows come home on the stock specific board.
And NBRI dropped from all time highs because it was the focus of a message board coordinated pump and dump, not because of the price of gold. NBRI is not a gold producer now, let alone then. That is my opinion on that matter.
This board is to discuss either Ethics or Philosophy of stock trading/investment.
It is not intended to be an extension of the already existent NBRI board. Please keep these type discussions there in the future.
If you have something to contribute that is on topic with the intention of this private board great. If you wish to keep discussing NBRI like this is the NBRI board I am going to delete it, and three strikes you are out around here.
If you don't like how this private board operates or the topics intended to be discussed, feel free to start your own.
About 90% of that drop was the POG was $1850 and going to $2500. Today its $1250. That is a world of difference to any gold miner.
My point is if gold had continued its bull run then yes NBRI would have continued its bull run.
I have little doubt gold will get back to those levels and when it does so will NBRI. By that time NBRI will also be pulling enough gold to take that run to the next level.
I could be wrong and gold could drop further. The Chinese seem to like gold though.
Here is the precedent where the SEC applied internet promotion to Section 17(b) of the Securities Act of 1933:
http://www.sec.gov/litigation/admin/33-7885.htm
I.
The Securities and Exchange Commission ("Commission") deems it appropriate and in the public interest that public administrative proceedings be instituted pursuant to Section 8A of the Securities Act of 1933 ("Securities Act") against John Black ("Black").
II.
In anticipation of the institution of this administrative proceeding, Black has submitted an Offer of Settlement ("Offer") which the Commission, after due consideration, has determined is in the public interest to accept. Solely for the purpose of these proceedings, and any other proceedings brought by or on behalf of the Commission or in which the Commission is a party, Black, without admitting or denying the findings contained herein, except admitting the jurisdiction of the Commission over him and the subject matter of these proceedings, consents to the issuance of this Order Instituting Public Administrative Proceedings, Making Findings, and Issuing a Cease-and-Desist Order ("Order").
III.
Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED that public administrative proceedings pursuant to Section 8A of the Securities Act be, and hereby are, instituted.
IV.
On the basis of this Order and the Offer, the Commission finds that:
Summary:
A. This matter involves an employee of an investor relations firm, who touted stock on an Internet bulletin board without disclosing that he was being compensated for the posts by his employer. This employee, the respondent in this proceeding, failed to disclose that he was promised thousands of shares of stock as a bonus for assisting his employer in promoting the stock of Snelling Travel, Inc. ("SNLV"), which is quoted on the over-the-counter bulletin board. The respondent's failure to disclose this remuneration was fraudulent, and in violation of Section 17(b) of the Securities Act, which makes it unlawful for any person to tout stocks for consideration without fully disclosing the consideration.
Respondent:
B. John Black, a resident of Vancouver, Canada, was employed by a Vancouver investor-relations firm, Fleming Financial Corp. ("Fleming Financial"), during the relevant period.
Respondent's Conduct:
C. Fleming Financial was retained in mid-1999 by a privately held company, Plus Solutions, Inc. ("Plus Solutions"), to provide various services, which included locating a publicly traded shell corporation with which Plus Solutions could merge. Plus Solutions is a development-stage company purportedly planning to develop and market software for electronic commerce. In November 1999, Fleming Financial recommended a merger with SNLV, which had filed a registration statement with the Commission and was approved for listing on the OTC-BB. Both SNLV and Plus Solutions had no operations or revenues at the time.
D. In or about late November or early December 2000, Black had a discussion with the individual who owns and operates Fleming Financial. The discussion concerned strategies for promoting the stock of SNLV. Black agreed to post messages touting SNLV's stock on the Internet as a means of promoting SNLV. Black was promised a bonus of thousands of SNLV shares in exchange for his efforts to promote the stock
E. The proposed merger agreement between Plus Solutions and SNLV provided, among other things, that Black would receive 5,000 shares of SNLV stock. SNLV issued a press release on December 15, 1999, announcing the merger of Plus Solutions and SNLV.
F. On December 30, 1999, Black started a subject area for SNLV on Raging Bull, an Internet bulletin board. Using a screen name other than his own, Black posted the first message in the SNLV subject area. Black's message compared SNLV to two highly successful companies that sell electronic commerce software applications, Commerce Once, Inc. ("CMRC") and Ariba Technologies ("ARBA"). Black's message stated:
This is THE new CMRC and ARBA!!! Merger to be complete on Jan. 6. This baby is going to rock!!! I hear they are looking for $30.00 by Mar. 15!!! We will just have to wait and see!!! The sky is the limit!!!
Black did not disclose his agreement with Fleming Financial, which entitled to him to receive 5,000 shares of SNLV as reimbursement for promoting SNLV.
G. On December 31, 1999, Black posted a second message in the SNLV subject area, using a different screen name. Black's message stated:
When will the company finish the merger? How many shares are out? What are the similarities between Plus Solutions and ARBA and CMRC? When will they be "in the money"? These are questions that MUST be answered by somebody! Anybody know a # to call?
As in the first message, Black did not disclose that he was entitled to receive remuneration for touting SNLV.
H. On or about January 11, 2000, SNLV and Plus Solutions terminated the proposed merger agreement. As a result of the termination, Black did not receive the 5,000 shares he would have received as part of the merger transaction.
Black's Violations of Sections 17(b) of the Securities Act:
I. Section 17(b) of the Securities Act makes it unlawful for any person to tout a stock without disclosing the nature and substance of any consideration, whether present or future, direct or indirect, received from an issuer, underwriter or dealer. The respondent violated Section 17(b) by touting SNLV on Raging Bull without disclosing the fact that he was promised compensation for doing so. See In the Matter of David A. Wood, Jr. et al., 68 SEC Docket 631 (Oct. 27,1998) (respondent violated Section 17(b) by posting messages on Internet message board touting company without disclosing compensation received); In the Matter of Eugene B. Martineau, 68 SEC Docket 629 (Oct. 27, 1998) (respondent violated Section 17(b) by posting messages on Internet message board touting company without disclosing expected compensation). Black committed or caused violations of Section 17(b) by failing to disclose the agreement to receive, indirectly from the issuer, compensation for touting SNLV stock.
V.
Based upon the foregoing, the Commission deems it appropriate to accept Black's Offer of Settlement.
Accordingly, it is HEREBY ORDERED, pursuant to Section 8A of the Securities Act, that Black cease and desist from committing or causing any violation and any future violation of Section 17(b) of the Securities Act.
By the Commission.
Jonathan G. Katz
Secretary
http://www.sec.gov/litigation/admin/33-7885.htm
Thank you waterchaser for the support.
Bruce that one interview the CEO did he mentioned the potential is billions of dollars. Imagine he thinks his properties have potential. He should be kicked in the face for such deception.
Nbri-Malc is also a bit misguided..I do a public search and NBRI comes up on this board..NBRI is the opposite of the purpose of the board( if I were to assume the board was about ethics)..If anything nbri should be the poster stock of an ethics board..CEO Leopold has always been on the up and up and to imply otherwise is BS..But continue on if you feel it's right-no good deed goes unnoticed..
Malc, thank you for your efforts to counter the mindless pumping and paid promotion that permeates IHUB. We all know that paid awareness disclosure is a rare thing in these parts and hopefully some day the SEC will catch-up with these thieves. Please know that there are many of us that admire your tenacity and well researched DD in this cesspool known as the OTC.
No relation whatsoever I suppose. Just asking. This is a board about Ethics you know.
I am somewhat familiar with it..How does it relate to me or NBRI?
Well, I try to keep it civil around here but LMAO right back at ya and let's see who knows what they are talking about a year from now regarding the likelihood of NBRI success.
Hmmm. If one buys and holds a penny stock too long they will likely get choked?
I would agree with that. Congrats to those who dumped NBRI on some rooks at the top, I suppose.
Are you aware that Section 17(b) of the Securities Act of 1933 has been applied to internet message board posting?
LMAO
I assure you what they say to your face is not the same thing they tell me.
Have a good night.
Buy and hold to long..
I think my biggest complaint would be that NBRI is just a $4M company. To think they could possibly spend the money to prove beyond any doubt the Ruby has all the gold they think it has unrealistic. It's far cheaper to just mine the gold than it is to drill for SEC 7 verification. You see every gold mine is not a cookie cutter gold mine and some don't make sense to follow a set of outdated rules made for the average mine.
NBRI is such a tiny micro cap and has been priced for almost certain failure yet you criticize it like it is a hundred million dollar company paying dozens of executives a huge salary for doing nothing.
Your criticism is out of alignment with reality and instead of creating relationships with the people you claim to protect you alienate yourself from them with some of your obstinate refusals to see any possible positive outcome.
The FINRA warning you placed is a joke and should be removed. FINRA itself wouldn't put NBRI in the category for that warning them self. The FINRA warning was for bolted miners with no chance of ever mining anything. NBRI has an actual mine and they are actually mining gold. If they produce 500 ounces this year it would be more than enough to justify their micro cap status.
I think every forum should have balance. In the case of NBRI, the majority thinks this exploratory miner will make them rich, and they have billions in reserves waiting to be mined for 20 years and such.
A few of us see it differently, and provide balance to these daily claims.
Do you have a problem with that?
No I think I have you down. Did I ever say you were bashing for money?
I think its pretty clear why you bash the stocks you bash. I guess you think you are doing good work out there.
I think we both know neither of us has much effect on any PPS movements in the long run.
Tsk. Tsk. If you don't know by now that I do not play the pump and dump game, or manipulate stocks (bash to buy and all that jazz I am accused of) or promote stocks that I am compensated for without disclosure you really do not know me well at all.
No you said "So once one gets choked enough times they learn to choke someone else effectively"
I asked if that was how you feel.
Did you get choked enough that now you are the choker?
Oh, so the question is do I feel like I have been choked? What is the question sir?
I see. What is the proper technique for choking someone in the stock world?
Why? Am I not allowed to ask you a question?
If your goal is to be the first Ihub member banned on this board you are well on your way already.
Yes..Along with the proper technique..
Is that how you feel?
I see. So once one gets choked enough times they learn to choke someone else effectively?
Followers
|
16
|
Posters
|
|
Posts (Today)
|
0
|
Posts (Total)
|
506
|
Created
|
10/04/13
|
Type
|
Free
|
Moderator Huggy Bear | |||
Assistants newpontiac DeeDog coolerheadsprevail |
Posts Today
|
0
|
Posts (Total)
|
506
|
Posters
|
|
Moderator
|
|
Assistants
|
Volume | |
Day Range: | |
Bid Price | |
Ask Price | |
Last Trade Time: |