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.
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.
On the topic of due diligence for BGMO and Vista relationship. On June 26th someone sold 45,287 shares of Vista at the bid price of $.60 per share. This generated a gross sale of $27,167. The next day (June 27th) Vista issued a new share purchase agreement to Autilion which included a newly added purchase of 50,000 shares at $.50 per share. It is obvious that Autilion took the shares and dumped them on market with the proceeds then given to Vista. This is not legal and I'd love to see the paper trail on that transaction.
Unregistered Sales of Equity Securities.
"On June 27, 2013, pursuant to the Securities Purchase Agreement and the schedule set forth in the Amendment, the Company issued to Autilion an aggregate total of 50,000 shares of the Company’s common stock (the “ Shares ”) for $0.50 per share, resulting in proceeds to the Company of $25,000.
The Shares were offered and sold in a transaction exempt from registration under the Securities Act of 1933, as amended (“ Securities Act ”), in reliance on Section 4(2) thereof and Rule 506 of Regulation D thereunder. Autilion represented that it was an “accredited investor” as defined in Regulation D. The proceeds from the sale of the Shares will be used for general corporate purposes "
This not good for Vista because it appears they found a way to 'skirt' the law by issuing shares to a foreign entity that did not need to go through the registration process. The foreign entity then sold the shares to fund the purchase with the proceeds going to Vista. The timing was very suspect as well because it happened just prior to them filing their 10K, which would have cost Vista approximately $25,000 in accounting fees. If the SEC didn't know about this, they do now and it's more trouble for both companies.
On the topic of selling unregistered shares...this not good for Vista because it appears they found a way to 'skirt' the law by issuing shares to a foreign entity that did not need to go through the registration process. The foreign entity then sold the shares to fund the purchase with the proceeds going to Vista. The timing was very suspect as well because it happened just prior to them filing their 10K, which would have cost Vista approximately $25,000 in accounting fees. If the SEC didn't know about this, they do now and it's more trouble for both companies.
The 'process' involves estimating the amount of tonnage that can be composted in a single year. This estimate is done by a non-governmental enterprise. When the estimates are know, the company enters into a lengthy contract, say 10 years. That contract would then be sold on the open carbon credit market like any other commodity. Composting waste that is detrimental to the atmosphere, like animal manure, is one of the highest per-ton carbon credit generators.
ON the topic of the accuracy of your posts...Majo, don't go getting your pants in a wad. You had an opinion based on what you were told by a reliable source, but you made a mistake by quoting private conversations with someone that knew you were minutes from posting whatever he told you on this board. Consequently, IMO you were appropriately not given whatever could have been considered inside information. The CEO apparently knew better than to tell you anything that's not yet public info and you should have known better than to post what he said. In fact, the CEO of any public company is probably the worse source there is for learning anything not already in the public domain. Too bad the Ref won't take your calls anymore, or maybe you could learn something new.
You don't how funny that is, apparently you've talking to the wrong people. neither Arpro or several have ever stopped trying to help the company. What have you done lately...or ever, for that manner?
So...on the topic of BGMO being a JV partner of Vista. BGMO has not performed and they are not a JV partner in any sense of the term. I suggest you re-read, or read for the first time, the agreement. It is a 'securities purchase agreement' that includes BGMO that includes giving their voting rights to Vista's board of directors, which, if true, would a dumb as believing Bergamo will write a check for $36 million.
ON THE TOPIC OF BGMO being a Joint Venture partner with Vista. They absolutely are not now and will not be in the future, even if they put up the $36 million, LMAO! They purportedly are buying shares without voting power, which really makes this whole agreement even more laughable. The only connection they currently have to Vista is they apparently own 50,000 shares of Vista's restricted stock and I would love to see who's name is on that certificate.
I think it would have more accurate for you to say that you "haven't heard" anything about possible deals in Texas from the CEO, rather then the CEO told you this or that. I think the Ref is probably in a better position than you to know what's transpiring, but I would encourage him to keep what he knows to himself. Also, the CEO is not going to release anything that may be viewed as a so-called pump. When projects significant to the company become more viable, we will all hear about them, but until then it's just speculation by anxious shareholders.
Are suggesting there are no politics in business? IMO that viewpoint highlights ones naïveté, as business of any kind is full of them at almost every level.
Listen up...I don't care how close you may think you are to this CEO or the CEO of any publicly-traded company, if you call him and ask about something that may be in the planning stages and not yet released to the general public, do not expect that CEO to inform you about ANY project status questions. Also, as near as I can see, Stripes is the only shareholder out there 'shaking the bushes' for the betterment of the company. His enthusiasm is somewhat unbridled, but I believe he's made some serious progress and should be commended, not scorned. I'd also say he should 'reel it in a bit' on the 'progress' comments, but don't stop trying to make something happen.
Obviously it's easy to be cynical about GEC after all these years, but the people involved in the recent revelations are not 'small time' individuals, so I'd pay more attention to that than listening to people posting about how knowledgeable they are when they actually have few clues about this company or it's expansion plans.
ON THE TOPIC OF proving the non-existence of money in BGMO's mythical bank account, shouldn't BGMO be proving the existence of said funds? And I'm not talking about a letter from a low-rent accountant saying they viewed an unaudited photo copy of a bank account statement that wasn't even in Bergamo's name. If someone needed my bank account info it would be very easy to produce acceptable documents, Bergamo's documents were not acceptable proof by anyone's standards...well, almost anyone.
Nothing happens without CEO and IMO he is involved.
On the TOPIC OF if BGMO knew the SEC was investigating them...absolutely they knew and so did Vista. The SEC leaves no stone unturned during their investigation. Vista basically let the SEC do the due diligence they could not do and they will acknowledge so in the next 7 days...game, set, match for the so-called relationship. IMO, and the rest of the free world, revocation is next step for Bergamo and Vista is on the hunt again for capital.
Investman, Lucky et. al.....I would like you opinions on MY theory ON THE TOPIC OF THE SEC ACTION against Bergamo. I've been wondering why BGMO would fork over 25 large when I am 110% positive they were aware of the SEC investigation. In fact, they would have known about it for several months when they wrote the check and new funding terms agreed to. My theory is that they were hoping giving Vista some small amount of money would 'stave off' any predictable action like what we have witnessed by the regulators. Could it be they were naïve to think that would work? They had to know if the Feds came down on them the whole scam was over. What other reason could there have been? Any port in a storm I guess.
The 10Q may be due this week, but I giving big odds that all we'll see week is a 5 day extension.
We've all read the letter 15 times and our collective opinions don't really matter. The SEC read it more times than that and here is their opinion (short version): Don't buy this POS or you will lose your money.
From post # 38885 on BGMO board:
"I already filed a complaint with the PCAOB (Public Company Accounting Oversight Board), the agency that certifies and manages public company auditors. They finally got back to me today to start their investigation on LL Bradford.
LL Bradford had no business drafting that letter, especially to be used in a press release to induce investment. They violated ethics, and professional code of conduct. It is up to the PCAOB, but what a waste of a certification for some idiotic issuer like this. Why throw your license in the garbage for some pump and dump scheme.
Not very smart. LL Bradford already has deficiencies in their prior audits. It is in their file. In my entire career, I have never had an inquiry let alone a disciplinary action. What scum."
Birds of a feather.......
Actually, your comment numbers 1 and 2 are right on the money...no pun intended.
You must know why he didn't show them the statements prior to the death blow. Please enlighten us. Was it because he didn't feel like it...or maybe didn't think it was important. What was the reason??
Apparently you have some really solid proof that BGMO is not a scam, so here's my suggestion to you and others that have this same proof. Call or email the people listed below and tell them what you know and I'm sure they'll appreciate your firsthand knowledge.
Sanjay Wadwha, (212) 336-0181 or wadwhas@sec.gov
Associate Regional Director, New York Regional Office
George N. Stepaniuk, (212) 336-0173 or stepaniukg@sec.gov
Assistant Regional Director, New York Regional Office
This is from Autilion AG's website. This company has been out of business for over two years. Don't you think that's a little strange for a company with all that money.
Recipient: <info@autilion.com>
Reason: 5.1.1 The email account that you tried to reach does not exist. Please try 5.1.1 double-checking the recipient's email address for typos or 5.1.1 unnecessary spaces. Learn more at 5.1.1 http://support.google.com/mail/bin/answer.py?answer=6596 pi10si10779896icc.96 - gsmtp
Okay...listen carefully. The 8K was written on July 30th, but did not get Edgarized until late that day, not making in time on Friday to get filed with the SEC until Monday. The SEC released its action to close Bergamo on Monday, and trust me, Vista had no idea that action was coming. Besides that, there was only a small CYA sentence referring to Autilion, which in reality has no relationship with Bergamo or anyone else for that matter. It is an out of business software company is Switzerland. Please...why do you think the SEC slipped Bergamo the arsenic?? Maybe because not one thing they purported as fact was true. Absolutely.
Huh?? What chu talkin' bout Willis? That 8K was written on July 30th relating to a $250K note issued by the company to Platinum Long Term Growth for a cash advance that happened on July 27th. The SEC came down on BGMO on Aug 2nd and I guarantee you both Platinum and Vista are trying to figure out damage control at this very moment.
Right...this is the one they now HAVE to refute. In fact, they should have done it within 3 days after the SEC death notice to Bergamo. Technically, Vista is currently 'out of compliance'.
ON THE TOPIC OF $88 MILLION...of course it will happen. HH has just found a pair of ruby red slippers under this flying house and is currently clicking them together three times while saying "give me $88 million, give me $88 million, give me $88 million". This works every time, just ask all the other Munchkins standing around him.
The stock's daily volume is measured in the hundreds of dollars, not real exciting if you ask me. However, it was interesting the stock started its first upswing period in several months on the exact day the SEC announced the death blow to Bergamo. You can look for an announcement next week by Vista that they are separating themselves from Bergamo. And if they don't do this, you can stick a fork in them as well.
I may be one of the few people posting on IHUB that has actually been connected to both a move to the Grey sheet and an SEC investigation. The Grey sheet bump was just before FINDRA and prompted by the company, which was an Act 34, being several filings behind, but still doing press releases. The SEC just sends a notice that your company will now be traded on the Grey sheets until the delinquent filing are made. That was requirement was done and the company moved to the Pinks, but not back to the BB. Even getting an MM to get you back on the Pinks was a giant hassle.
Sometime later the stock made a run and someone complained to the SEC that the PR's were misleading. The SEC then sends the company an "Informal" investigation notice, which most certainly happened to Bergamo. This notice is NOT ever made public. They simply want to see everything backing all financial AND business relationships related claims made by the company. Then they subpoena all the individuals related to those claims and "grill" each one of them as to their participation in the "subjects" of the investigation.
They also, at the expense of the company, subpoena all the records from the transfer agent to see who's been benefitting from the sale of company shares. After carefully examining all the materials and interviews, they render a decision, which in the case I described, was complete exoneration. However, this outcome did not happened to Bergamo and there will no more "examination", like suggested by a few "diehards" still posting for BGMO. Basically their ass is grass and the SEC is a lawnmower. Additionally, BGMO's CEO, being a lawyer, is in a lot more trouble the average Pink sheet bandit. His age will probably save him, but not the BGMO "shell". It is as dead as it can be. In fact, it may not make it back to the Greys, or won't be there for long. When a company like Bergamo is so fast, loose and devious with their pump, revocation is a dead certainty.
If something walks like a duck, quacks like duck, there's a pretty good chance it's a duck...not a turkey and not a pig. Perhaps that's not a fair comparison because Bergamo could be a turkey or a pig.
Integral, I just posted this on VSTA board and it will no doubt be removed as soon some administrator reads. That's the story of my IHUB existence. But good job by you! Too bad you weren't around sooner.
From VSAT Board to Investman432:
"Very nice work by you and Integral, but the big question is why did it take so long to get after BGMO and LL Bradford. It's been a scam forever and the SEC should have jumped on them the day after that compilation letter was used to promote the company. I only get one post a day on BGMO or I'd give Integral direct props. Again, good job, although the BS posts will probably never end."
Please help us all out here...show us a document or verified statement showing that HSBC made a direct investment in BGMO. In fact, show us where it made an unverifiable acknowledgement that the bank made an investment directly in Bergamo. I don't believe making a photo copy of someone else's account statement from any bank represents an investment in a particular company, and even it were true, why would the bank have liability. They have zero control over one of their customer's showing a personal statement to anyone that the account holder chooses to show. This liability theory for document authenticity is as ridiculous as it gets...well, maybe it can get more ridiculous, as we've seen in the past few days.
Really great news for BGMO....
BGMOBergamo Acquisition Corp.
Caveat Emptor Common Stock / Status : Suspended OTC Pink No Information
OTC Markets Group Inc. (“OTC Markets”) has discontinued the display of quotes on www.otcmarkets.com for this security because it has been labeled Caveat Emptor (Buyer Beware) for one of the following reasons:
?Promotion/Spam without Adequate Current Information — The security is being promoted to the public, but adequate current information about the issuer has not been made available to the public. OTC Markets believes adequate current information must be publicly available during any period when a security is the subject of ongoing promotional activities having the effect of encouraging trading of the issuer's securities. At such instances, as a matter of policy, when adequate current information is not made available, OTC Markets will label the security as "Caveat Emptor." Promotional activities may include spam email, unsolicited faxes or news releases, whether they are published by the issuer or a third party.
?Investigation of Fraud or Other Criminal Activities — There is an investigation of fraudulent or other criminal activity involving the company, its securities or insiders. When OTC Markets becomes aware of such investigation, the companies’ securities may be subject to Caveat Emptor.
?Suspension/Halt — A regulatory authority or an exchange has halted or suspended trading for public interest concerns (i.e. not a news or earnings halt).
?Undisclosed Corporate Actions — The security or issuer is the subject of a corporate action, such as a reverse merger, stock split, or name change, without adequate current information being publicly available.
?Unsolicited Quotes — The security has only been quoted on an unsolicited basis since it entered the public markets and the issuer has not made adequate current information available to the public.
?Other Public Interest Concern — OTC Markets has determined that there is a public interest concern regarding the security. Such concerns may include but are not limited to promotion, spam or disruptive corporate actions even when adequate current information is available.
So if you had $88 million in the bank and wanted to stay current and avoid this death notice above, would you not have paid the $5,000 or so to keep the company current, especially in the middle of this very important funding?
So which of the following is probably true A)they don't have the $5,000 B)They had the money but accountant won't touch this POS C)They are dumber than a mud fence D)Just didn't think the SEC would ever act D) They "get off" on screwing with shareholders E)They needed and excuse blow the POS up F)all of the above and a few more I didn't mention.
So are your two posts an indication you won't being buying any shares in the near future?
I am certain you fail to realize the seriousness of this event. It's one thing to be 'Grey-sheeted' for being late on your filings, but it's quite another to be suspended for the reasons that caused this event, those being blatant fraud allegations. The SEC will ask for documents to audit that BGMO was not willing to produce for their accountants. How do you think that will go? BTW they are not currently on the Greysheets, but will end up there in two weeks and no non-reporting Pinkies relegated to that status every sees the light of day again, as it is far less costly to find another shell without all the negative history.
As for why people are still kicking the dead horse. It's probably in response to the posters who still tout the company in the face of those who have been warning all these years that is was a scam. They were right and the touters were wrong. If you don't like what the non-supporters are saying, simply quit giving them material to respond to. You're not going to help save this turkey, so just go silent and to see what happens, which IMO will be terminal silence from HH and company. The reports of its death are not greatly exaggerated.
Actually, this suspension may be exactly what HH wanted. He now has some hated government agency to blame for his demise...like if they had just left him alone he would have made a lot of money for his shareholders. Of course that's sick, but then, so is the man. Whatever the motive, he could have filed more phony financials and continued the charade for very little cost, but when the 'gig' is up, the 'gig' is up.
Someone said they will be back on the Grey Sheets in two weeks, but that means no market makers or electronic trades. Good luck selling at par value, now looking like the guy who paid par for 62 million shares got what he what he paid for, or perhaps less.
Well, maybe not daily trading at the moment, but if you can 'gin-up' enough new interest and move the volume up, the SP will follow. Depending on the evaluation the company receives for the CC's, you should stock back over a penny or slightly higher for the short term, but if CC broker is successful in moving CC's it could be a good day trader or hold.
The Obama carbon credit cartel tried very early to get the cap and trade thing going but were turned away by congress. IMO the result was the EPA closing coal-fired energy plants that may have survived if a US carbon credit exchange existed. That may sound "far out", but look what happened to the industry. There about to lose 17,000 jobs, but nobody in the Obama cartel could care less. But this lesson was not lost on others in other 'green' states and they are now pushing the whole 'Kyoto Accord' CC concept. When it takes off there will be a lot money made by the early birds and I think GEC just might be one of those.
It might be a good idea to remove the 'sticky note' relating to Bergamo and to VSTA to file an 8K regarding its BGMO relationship.
Ever hear of 'day trading'?
Well you were right about BGMO being an "explosive" stock, or was that "implosive"? FOGLMAO
Well you were right about one company getting a surprise. Of you probably will say BGMO getting suspended is no big deal, except you can no longer "accumulate" any shares.....or de-accumulate.