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.
That answer probably falls with Gouger, guess he's the one that got shareholders money (or at least a good portion). Indicative to his MO and his involvement with his stocks.
He doesn't take care of his other responsibilities either and the RCC will yank his license, permits, and leases if he doesn't get it together.
http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=71264152
http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/replies.aspx?msg=71264152
FBI and Attorney General Involved with Oil SCAM
Another Executive Convicted of Oil and Gas Investment Fraud
Northern District of Texas Successfully Prosecuted Numerous Individuals for Fraud in Connection with Oil and Gas Investments in Recent Years
http://www.fbi.gov/dallas/press-releases/2012/another-executive-convicted-of-oil-and-gas-investment-fraud
"In fact I bet anything they settled in the first place, but remains to be seen until the new report comes out."
Well, didn't have to wait long, the new report just came out. Absolutely ZERO short interest for CRWV.
http://www.otcbb.com/asp/OTCE_Short_Interest_popup.asp?Symbol=crwv&StlmtDt=01/13/2012
No implication, just the data and place to observe and/or be informed of any information about the oil well and the stock including the permit in which you were commenting on. When and if the well ever gets drilled the activity will have to be recorded at the state and abilities to get that information will be there.
If your talking about my PR's or company statements remark, many times PR's and company statements do not jive with the official recordings or not fully disclose the information that is readily available at the Texas authorities.
"Mr. D'Amaro, who is already serving a three-year sentence in a Miami jail for the scheme, agreed to the ban and to a $217,903 disgorgement order to settle the case. While he did not admit to any wrongdoing in settling, he pleaded guilty to parallel criminal charges in March, 2010."
That's classic, like he had any choice but to "agree". I remember reading somewhere where the authorities were trying to eliminate the ability to "not admit to any wrongdoing". That's such a joke.
Looks like internet privileges should be scrutinized in the jails a bit more also.
Oil and Gas Well Scams are One of the Most Common Con Games in America.
"Typical oil and gas scams are handled by swindlers......"
Looks like the lawyers have a good business for the oil news as well.
http://www.oilandgasfraud.com/
Actually the best and official place for ANY action or drilling, oil production, etc is the State of Texas
http://www.rrc.state.tx.us/data/online/index.php
http://webapps.rrc.state.tx.us/DP/drillDownQueryAction.do?fromPublicQuery=Y&name=SANGER%2BHEIRS&univDocNo=486479312
http://webapps.rrc.state.tx.us/DP/viewW1PdfFormAction.do?submit=permitPdf
The drilling permit that Gouger just keeps renewing over the years hasn't anything going on there. Everything that is done with oil and gas has to go through the Railroad Commission of Texas and get reported.
The specific data for Gouger (Tejones and Sanger) for Queries is:
Operator & P-5 # 841338
Permit # 711831
API # 42-297-34985
Lease Name SANGER HEIRS
Field Name and # WILDCAT 00004001
Again anything that has to do with oil in the State of Texas has to be documented on a regular basis, including any Severances (violations) and it doesn't matter what any PR or company states.
I remember talking about this back in Oct 11 and of course it was tried to be dismissed as nothing. I guess the Sept statement pretty much put an answer to it. BA owning shares is NOT a good thing, they will Pump and Dump one way or another. If they can't it will only be due to legal issues and that will not be any positive either for AQLV.
Well obvious Big Apple was involved and makes it an issue. There is no confirmation that any involvement is indeed only in the past. There very well might be current involvement. That was the question and no reasonable answer has been given that past associations with an otc company is not included in the fact that the odds that it can possibly effect current issues of any company. As it so many times does in the sub-penny world.
I know the article is given to be a positive, and I guess it's a small step in the right direction, but the numbers given of amount of employees (ie: only double in twenty years), amount of cases, etc are quite minute to the problems at hand.
One statement is true though;
"Nationwide, the SEC has fewer than 4,000 employees, Mr. Bustillo said, "very small considering the size of the industry we oversee.""
In reality it would probably take ten times that to make a dent in issues that the SEC is in charge of. Only in our dreams I'm sure. A change to the better is better than no change at all I guess.
ZERO connection to any oil industry news.
In fact a lot of ZEROs for BNPD
ZERO short interest for last period.
http://www.otcbb.com/asp/OTCE_Short_Interest_popup.asp?Symbol=BNPD&StlmtDt=01/13/2012
ZERO oil pumping on last report
http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=70979937
ZERO volume so far today
ZERO income and assets not worth counting for BNPD
http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=68547508
ZERO profit for shareholders
ZERO filings with OTCBB
http://www.otcbb.com/asp/Info_Center.asp
ZERO follow through or transparency with any of BNPD's fluff PR's
I could go on but there is ZERO reasons for investing in this and paying any attention to foolishly trying to connect BNPD with oil industry news.
But they have a nice R/S planned for anyone that wants it and will probably be the only thing Gouger makes good on. Followed by dumping and destruction of the pps of course.
Talk about the long arm of the law. Guess some won't hide there anymore. Seen these sites like Megaupload be shut down, and within days are up again. Many like the free movie streaming, but there is definitely another side of it. Should be some middle ground somewhere. There is a lot of well known large corporations advertising at sites with nothing but the links to these type of infringement problems.
Third and fourth parties, pumpers, promo groups, etc get their share of the loot. You can search through the DTCC notices and this list is a pretty good one. I feel it is more accurate than any other. The guy has done pretty good with it.
http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=71208053
No, BNPD is not chilled. Should be, and may very well be in the future. A name change will definitely not solve it's problems, in reality the constant shell name and ticker changes in these dirty pinks are part of the problem. That reverse will be just part of the rinse and repeat game. No real companies, just shell stock selling.
This thing is barely staying on the board. Exciting price hold, LOL. Very minimal volume and 2/3 of that has sold today so far has been at .002, over 16% lower than yesterday close.
Not that it matters, BNPD might as well be on the grey sheets or chilled by the DTCC for all the action it's getting.
Someone throw another C note at it, wake it up. LOL (Sarcasm intended of course)
Not their job or responsibility. Those guidelines are already there. Just follow SEC, FINRA, and common business and trading practice rules. Shady companies like CRWV that have conflicting financials, irresponsible business practices, and lack of their own company transparency don't fit into those guidelines.
Yes, practices like CRWV is exhibiting have been gotten away with in the past. There is bigger money in selling shares and ideas of gold (for example like CRWV), or hopes and dreams to investors than it is to carry out a real business. Lot easier and quicker too. The SEC and other governing bodies are way under staffed or underfunded and can't even get to all the offenders (in fact just a very small percentage). The insiders and owners of shells know this and abuse it. These shells and companies like CRWV have been going amok.
So it's no surprise when a company like CRWV falls into the chills. The odds of a "good company" falling into it would be rare without not following the necessary guidelines that are already known, just not enforced.
Many want to blame the DTCC, but it's not their fault, it's the companies. The DTCC actually does a pretty good job considering all that they do. Monopoly, maybe. But that's the American market way and some entity has to do it. The way the trading system is set up and controlled, it would be very hard to have multiple systems or different companies doing it.
At this point it's over 99% chance they will never get reinstatement. But if they miraculously beat the less than 1% odds, you'll be able to tell by the overall trading and brokers.
The DTCC actually does give a reason, it's just not what people want to hear. It's called risk assessment. CWRV is too much risk. That's not quite the same risk that traders or investors have. The DTCC is in business of getting shares (or securities) and monies for those securities of a company (CRWV) through the system.
When there is problems with those securities, such as CRWV has, it creates possible losses for DTCC who has responsibilities of making sure those securities of CRWV are valid and paid for.
It could take years for reinstatement and one of the reasons that it almost never happens (giving credence to there may be one or two that has done it). Usually pinky companies like CRWV don't last that long and the shells get passed from one company business to another after degrading pps, increased A/S then R/S rinse and repeat games, etc.
CRWV company has only made it's presence for about 6 months now out of nowhere, been Pumped and Dumped, and lost about 98% of it's value. It has big issues with it's securities and claims of it's business. But the issues with it's securities are a major one with the DTCC and it's process and DTCC's business.
A good flow chart of how CRWV has to be processed by the DTCC (DTC and NSCC) and where CRWV is or isn't now on that system and why it's a problem for CRWV and the rest of the Chilled list is shown in this post.
http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=68106685&txt2find=DTCC
Stanford Told ‘Lie After Lie’ to Investors, U.S. Prosecutor Says
January 25, 2012, 12:23 AM EST
SEC Asks Judge to Order Payout Plan for Stanford Investors
Allen Stanford’s Prospective Jurors Probed for Bias by Judge
UBS Customer, Insider Trading, Deutsche Boerse: Compliance
Galleon, JPMorgan, Gupta, Apple, Merrill, UBS in Court News
Stanford Investors Endure ‘Living Hell’ on Eve of Fraud Trial
By Andrew Harris, Laurel Brubaker Calkins and Tom Schoenberg
Jan. 25 (Bloomberg) -- R. Allen Stanford engaged in a long- term fraud scheme and lied repeatedly to investors to “live the life of a billionaire,” a U.S. prosecutor told jurors as the financier’s criminal trial started in Houston.
Stanford, 61, was the ringleader of a $7 billion investment fraud, the U.S. said in a 14-count indictment accusing him of mail fraud and wire fraud, crimes that carry maximum sentences of 20 years in prison. He’s also charged with conspiracy to commit mail fraud and wire fraud and to obstruct a U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission probe.
“I plead not guilty to every count,” Stanford, wearing a light gray plaid suit and a white dress shirt and no necktie, told the jury yesterday.
Stanford has been in federal custody since being indicted in June 2009. His trial was postponed three times because of changes to his legal defense team, the after-effects of a jailhouse beating and a subsequent prescription-drug addiction.
In Washington yesterday, the SEC urged a judge to order the federal Securities Investor Protection Corp. to create a claims process for Stanford’s alleged victims.
Stanford stole from investors “so that he could live the lifestyle of a billionaire,” Assistant U.S. Attorney Gregg Costa said in his opening statement in the Houston courtroom. “He told them lie after lie after lie.”
The scheme stretched over 20 years of “lying, cheating and bribing,” Costa told the jury of 10 men and five women, including three alternates.
‘Real’ Empire
“Mr. Stanford’s financial empire was real and did make a lot of money and did pay every penny of what was owed to depositors for 22 years,” Robert Scardino, one of Stanford’s court-appointed lawyers, told the jury in his own opening remarks.
Scardino and defense lawyer Ali Fazel have previously said they will use the records of Houston-based Stanford Group Co. and Antigua-baed Stanford International Bank Ltd. to prove their client never intended to defraud anyone.
No investor lost money until the SEC sued Stanford and obtained a court order to take control of his businesses in February 2009, the defense has said.
Costa called the $7 billion in deposits once held by Stanford’s Antigua bank “a real number.”
“How did Mr. Stanford get so many people to give him so much of their savings?” Costa asked. “That’s where the lying comes in.”
Stanford lied to depositors about the liquidity of their investments, about whether his bank ever loaned those proceeds and about who was managing their money, the prosecutor said.
‘Compound Fraud’
“You’re going to see the power of compound fraud,” he said.
The financier lied about committing $700 million of his own money to shore up the bank’s finances in 2008, while he was actually pulling money out, Costa said.
Stanford also “waved his magic wand” to increase the value of an unimproved island property from $63 million to $3 billion during the worst economic downturn since the Great Depression, according to the prosecutor.
The financier is accused of bribing his now-dead auditor and an Antiguan banking regulator who received cash, National Football League Super Bowl championship tickets and use of Stanford’s private jets.
Costa told jurors they would hear from investors who lost their life savings. These witnesses will tell, “how his lying, stealing and bribing have taken that money and the dreams they had with it.”
‘Complete Picture’
Scardino told jurors the U.S. didn’t have full access to Stanford’s business records and wasn’t presenting “a complete picture” of his client’s business. He said Stanford invested more than $100 million to improve the island and obtain licenses that made the property more valuable.
The defense lawyer called his client “a Texas boy” and “a very resourceful businessman” who became a billionaire. He said the jury may hear from his client during the trial, without being more specific.
Stanford’s lawyer told the panel that the certificates of deposit sold by the Stanford bank weren’t securities and that Stanford’s clients had no say over how their money was invested.
The bank’s CDs were sold only in tranches valued at $50,000 or more, to investors with either a net worth of more than $1 million or an annual income of more than $200,000, the defense lawyer said.
Scardino called those CD purchasers “sophisticated investors” whom he said “know what a CD was and what it wasn’t.”
‘Legitimate’ Business
They also received promotional materials from Stanford’s business disclosing that past performance was no guarantee of future success and that an investor could lose the entirety of an investment.
“We’re going to prove this was not a Ponzi scheme at all,” Scardino said. Unlike frauds in which money from later- arriving investors is used to pay off earlier speculators, he said, “this one was legitimate.”
Marc Nurik, a Fort Lauderdale, Florida, attorney who has been following the Stanford proceedings, called the defense decision to hold out the prospect of Stanford’s testimony a risk. Stanford isn’t required to take the witness stand.
“The traditional wisdom is that you don’t set up for failure,” he said.
An opening statement is tantamount to the making of a promise to the jury, he said. Stanford’s failure to take the stand would breach that promise.
Nurik said Stanford might be pressing his lawyers to let him testify.
Jury Selection
Jury selection began Jan. 23 at Houston’s Bob Casey Federal Courthouse with U.S. District Judge David Hittner’s interview of 80 prospective panelists, many of whom said they had read or heard reports about the case and some of whom told the judge they didn’t know if they could be impartial.
The 15 men and women selected yesterday include a retail optician, an environmental engineer, two accountants, a kindergarten teacher, a chef, a land surveyor, a pawn broker and a retired hairdresser.
The trial may last about six weeks, Hittner said.
In Washington, SEC lawyers asked U.S. District Judge Robert Wilkins during a hearing yesterday to require SIPC, a nonprofit corporation funded by the brokerage industry, to start a liquidation proceeding in federal court in Texas to handle more than $1 billion in possible claims related to the alleged Stanford fraud.
Judicial Review
“Ultimately, what we’re seeking here is to provide a forum where claimants can seek judicial review of their claims,” Matthew Martens, the SEC’s chief litigator, told the judge during a three-hour hearing.
At issue is whether more than 7,000 brokerage customers who invested in the alleged Ponzi scheme run by Stanford are entitled to have their losses covered by SIPC.
SIPC, a congressionally chartered group that insures customers against losses caused by broker theft, says the Stanford investments don’t fit into the confines of the federal law that governs who’s eligible for the payouts. Investors and their advocates in Congress say SIPC is deliberately taking a narrow view of the law to protect brokers from higher assessments.
In June, the SEC ordered SIPC to start a process that could grant as much as $500,000 for each Stanford client -- the same maximum amount it offers in any case. After SIPC balked, the SEC for the first time sued the group in federal court in Washington.
Individual Investors
SIPC is responsible for providing coverage for individual investors who lose money or securities held by insolvent or failing member brokerage firms. It has agreed to cover losses sustained by victims of Bernard Madoff’s multibillion-dollar Ponzi scheme and investors who may have lost money in the October collapse of commodities broker MF Global Holdings Ltd.
SIPC doesn’t guarantee an investment’s value or protect against fraud, the agency said in court papers. It also doesn’t cover investments with offshore banks or non-member firms.
Stephen Harbeck, SIPC’s president, has said that SIPC shouldn’t get involved in the Stanford case because investors received actual CDs after the brokerage passed their money to a bank. What happened after that isn’t under SIPC’s purview because the Stanford account holders have possession of their securities, he told a court-appointed receiver in 2009.
The criminal case is U.S. v. Stanford, 09-cr-00342, U.S. District Court, Southern District of Texas (Houston). The civil case against Stanford is Securities and Exchange Commission v. Stanford International Bank Ltd., 09-cv-00298, U.S. District Court, Northern District of Texas (Dallas). The SIPC case is Securities and Exchange Commission v. Securities Investor Protection Corp., 11-mc-00678, U.S. District Court, District of Columbia (Washington).
--Editors: Peter Blumberg, Michael Hytha
To contact the reporter on this story: Andrew Harris in Houston at aharris16@bloomberg.net
To contact the editor responsible for this story: Michael Hytha at mhytha@bloomberg.net
http://www.businessweek.com/news/2012-01-25/stanford-told-lie-after-lie-to-investors-u-s-prosecutor-says.html
Very well said 1mb. Maybe should even be a sticky. Pink Sheet financials should in all probability be assumed to be inaccurate and misleading. The BS that companies put out to only activate the tier levels and sell shell stock are complete nonsense and blatantly inaccurate.
Not sure what the total answer is, but a fully reporting standard required would definitely be the focus. Pink Sheets could still make a buck, but SEC and GAAP standards would put an end to a big portion of the nonsense, criminal activity, and shell games.
In actuality that link and list is not the most reliable or the most accurate, but CRWV definitely has a DTCC chill according to the official notice from DTCC.
http://www.dtcc.com/downloads/legal/imp_notices/2012/nscc/a7360.pdf
Another polite Moderator Note: discussing how a DTCC chill in general IS on topic and has direct correlation to how it effects this particular stock CRWV. And I actually was the one who stickied the information.
Just an added quote from the Texas Authority. Gouger's (BNPD) 90 day extension started the first of November 2011 (was in violation then also and had to be given a severance to renew for the extension) and will end the first part of Feb. 2012. Of course there is not too much oil he's pumping out of the stripper/marginal wells and doesn't have a whole lot to "sever/seal" anyway. But it might put a damper on the pinky stock selling including his permit at the MXXH stock that he just keeps "renewing" over the years and doesn't do diddly there either (oil drilling rig still with a flat tire I presume).
If you do not comply with the new requirements, the Commission will be unable to renew your Organization Report or issue any permits to your organization. Your P-5 will become “Delinquent” and the Commission will begin to sever/seal your leases and wells and will ultimately initiate collection on your financial security.
Gouger better get his act in gear or he is risking loosing his P-5 operators abilities and his license revoked. Always sluffing off the proper procedures and getting in violation. Not a good way of doing business, that's for sure.
Effective September, 2010, the Railroad Commission (Commission) adopted amendments to existing Statewide Rules 1, 14, 21 and 78, and adopted a new Statewide Rule 15 to add the new statutory requirements and to add the surface equipment removal and inactive well requirements set out by HB 2259. (The Commission repealed the previous Rule 15 and incorporated its requirements relating to surface casing to be left in place into Rule 14.) Under the new requirements, all operators will be required to annually address their complete inventory of inactive wells to obtain approval of their annual Organization Report (Form P-5) renewal.
In 2011, the 82nd Texas Legislature (2011, Regular Session) enacted House Bill 3134 (HB3134) to address certain process issues. HB3134 provides that an operator who has complied with all P-5 renewal requirements except for those associated with HB2259 will be granted a 90-day extension to his P-5 active status in order to complete the work needed to comply with HB2259. HB3134 also provides that if an operator has been unable to achieve compliance by the end of that 90-day period, they may request a hearing on the matter. Pursuant to HB3134,
the operator will be required to pay for hearing costs if they choose to request a hearing. The 90-day extension process is already in place; however rulemaking will be necessary to
implement the hearing process; that rulemaking is not yet completed (as of 9/1/2011).
At least two of them are on the "bad" list. And for that reason alone would be a good reason to be at the very least very cautious of them. That just at first glance.
http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=71208053
Also this link for a quick read.
http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=68938706
No, the likelihood is that it WON'T get cleared up. The FACTS are that chilled stocks don't get cleared up and there is no reason why CRWV will. So CRWV is pretty much a dead horse.
This is the age of online trading. The majority of traders or investors like it that way and way too many won't bother to call their broker for pinks such as CRWV. The money will be online traded in other stocks -- one of the reasons that cause the problems in volume for a chilled stock.
"They are allowed, but you may have to call in your order to trade many microcap stocks like CRWV"
The statistics for the overwhelming bulk of chilled stocks do dwindle to very little or even no volume. No matter how it is attempted to be spun on message boards. It doesn't get cleared up and ends up being an issue for most and CRWV in all probability will end up like the hundreds of other chilled stocks. Thats part of why the DTCC is doing it.
Way too many traders and investors will not want to play CRWV with it's DTCC issues due to it will be less risk, cheaper, and better liquidity with monies somewhere else.
Link to any CRWV news.
http://ih.advfn.com/p.php?pid=news&symbol=CRWV
Yeah, got to be the naked ones coming through Canada. LOL The next report should be in the next week or a little longer and I'm sure that it will just be the minuscule short data that follows through each period. Maybe even all cleared and zero. I guess not that many really want to come up with the $2.50 per share to short a Chilled sub penny fluffed mining stock.
Just a quick plug and play into MS Office spreadsheet. A half a dozen entries, click, and wallah. Sometimes it helps seeing the big picture.
Here is what that "many shares short" looks like from the last CRWV short data on a pie chart.
http://www.otcbb.com/asp/OTCE_Short_Interest_popup.asp?Symbol=crwv&StlmtDt=12/30/2011
Plan might of been great until the DTCC Chill. Now the waiting until the pps goes up might be a bit difficult. Even if it does spike for a moment (I suspect the pps will go down a bit more before any real spike), the competition for getting rid of the shares is going to be quite a bit stiffer and less brokers to do it with.
Here are quite a few posts that do some great explaining.
http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/MemberPostsToBoard.aspx?userid=167790&boardid=12546
Also these:
http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/msgsearchbymember.aspx?searchID=191577&srchyr=2011&SearchStr=behl
Agreed. DTCC notices for CRWV are definitely very relevant and direct correlation to ability to invest or trade in it.
Tout or pump is only one syllable and GRIFTER is two. The only thing a BNPD investor or trader has to decide is which level of intelligence they want to have. LOL
Best place to do research is the information from the Texas authorities where by law everything like oil production of the wells, proration results (what the well is limited to producing or more violation and eventual shutdown if exceeded), and all the violations that the well operating company (Tejones - Gougers) is receiving (in which Gouger constantly gets and is regularly in violation of Texas laws).
The latest violation that BNPD (Gouger is constantly getting them) has received is the H-15 report that is delinquent. The H-15 is required by law for all shut-in wells which is number 2 well of the Bryan Estate Lease. After a year of non production, well number two is by law supposed to be fully plugged unless there is an extension granted by the Railroad Commission. Right now that is denied and a Severance (violation) has been issued.
RAILROAD COMMISSION OF TEXAS
Oil and Gas Division
NOTICE TO OIL AND GAS WELL OPERATORS
Testing of Older Inactive Wells (H-15 Program)
As Required by Statewide Rule 14(b)(3)
CHANGES TO TEST SCHEDULE
Any well, inactive one year or more and that is 25 or more years old, must be tested annually to ensure that it does not present a threat of pollution. In previous years, an annual schedule was
mailed out in January and all tests were due June 1st of the same year.
Starting in January 2008, the test schedules will be mailed out monthly, and will be based on assigned field. The start of testing will coincide with the annual surveys (G10/W10)
scheduled for each field and will allow 90 days to complete testing.
Please call Field Operations in Austin at (512) 463-6830 if you have any questions.
"I also like the fact that we see a PR and we don't get volume, all this means is the company is doing what it's supposed to do."
Classic, happiness fulfilled, this .0001-NO BID stock (CBYI) doesn't get any volume when there isn't any news either. LOL
"I also like the fact that we see a PR and we don't get volume, all this means is the company is doing what it's supposed to do."
The poster should be real happy then, the .0001-NO BID stock (CBYI) doesn't get any volume when there isn't any news either. LOL
Nothing surprising there for this one. Pretty much expected and the stats are that it is pretty much a death blow. Very, very seldom the ticker ever comes back, not even sure of one, but I heard there was one or two, just don't know of any myself.
Of course many continue to minimally trade on, but not too profitably and not with too much liquidity. The odds against CRWV now just increased ten fold or more.
Some good tips at the SEC site with oil and gas scams.
Once they have your money, scam artists pay themselves first, often using funds to pay personal expenses. In the end, only some of your money may be invested in an actual oil or natural gas well, or none at all.
Sales Pitches Focused on Highly Publicized News. Scam artists read the headlines, too. Often, they’ll use a highly publicized news item, like volatile gas prices, to lure potential investors and make their “opportunity” sound more legitimate.
“Can’t Miss” Wells. Every investment carries some degree of risk so you should be skeptical of any oil and gas investment opportunity pitched as completely safe. Fraudsters often spend a lot of time trying to convince you that extremely high returns are "guaranteed" or "can't miss." Don't believe it.
High Rates of Return. Compare promised yields with current returns on well-known stock indexes. Any investment opportunity that claims you'll get substantially more could be highly risky. And that means you might lose money.
Investor Tidbit:
You might be surprised to learn that the Railroad Commission of Texas oversees the Texas oil and gas industry. Unfortunately, state oil and gas regulatory agencies don’t have uniform names. If you’re having trouble finding the agency that regulates oil and gas in a particular state, enter the State’s name - followed by “oil and gas” - into your favorite Internet search engine. The appropriate agency should be listed near the top of your search results. If you are still having trouble, call us at (800) 732-0330.
Been on vacation. Pawson's stocks never change, he's the .0001 king. The $200 was for Peter Green's weekly groc bill to pump one of Pawson's other trip zero wonders. LOL