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.
Ok, I was assuming you meant counter-sue but whatever.
Ummmmm pardon me, but why counter-attack if you are innocent? Just trying to see your side of the situation.
What is the big deal with getting....
'sued' when Megas has stated that at least 95% of us are innocent? Doesn't sound so malicious to me.
sskillz or len, have you done a most improved type stat? From psl4 I mean, whether final position or percentage. Not a big deal, just curious.
Email from Mcafee & Taft:
Ok, this makes a lot more sense then suing the hell out of Megas for punitive damages. That's what their webpage seems to suggest.
The answer:
In a nutshell- yes. We are looking at a claim against the brokerage
firms who appear to have sold bogus stock certificates- among other
possible misdeeds. Our first order of business must however be to
exterminate the Oklahoma state court action.
If there is a claim for damages beyond attorneys' fees and costs, it
will probably be against those brokerage firms.
Joseph H. Bocock
Direct Phone 405-552-2256 | Direct Fax 405-228-7456
Joseph.Bocock@mcafeetaft.com
MCAFEE & TAFT
A PROFESSIONAL CORPORATION
instead of holding the worthless counterfeit crap you have now.
lol... my favorite part. :)
You and I are innocent of the charges. Just relax. Maybe step away from the computer for a day or two if you have to.
>>>" I will say that if I determine that I believe there is better than a 50% chance that the lawsuit is about us turning our shares over"
Hmmmmm... I for one can't figure out your logic behind that. Your emotions are clearly clouding your judgment here. Just my opinion/observation. But if you can provide something solid to back that up, I'll be glad to hear it.
Yup, this part makes sense to me.
>>>>>My interpretation was if they are fake, then they would go after the brokers.
Sure thing.
My email to McAfee & Taft
This should be good.
------------------------------------------------------------------
Hello,
I would like to inquire about your task force as I'm a defendant listed in the BCIT lawsuit. The webpage states:
In consideration of the reduced flat fee, the clients would allow the firm to keep any award of attorneys' fees or
costs that it might secure against those who filed the action and a percentage of any other damages recovered.
What sort of damages are you referring to here? The cost basis of our shares?
Also, this task force seems to aim squarely at suing CEO, Thomas Megas. It is my understanding that Mr. Megas is trying
to get are shares exchanged for shares that hold a real value. I'm referring to this PR from Nov 20, 2006:
http://biz.yahoo.com/pz/061120/109114.html
Now, it has been rumored that the hold-up in the share exchange is due to a 'global lock' imposed by the DTCC. Hopefully,
you can prove to me otherwise, but shouldn't your task force be targeting the DTCC and our brokers who sold us fraudulent
shares?
Thank you very much for your time. Look forward to hearing from you.
XXXXXXXXXXXXXX
RDG013, in your own opinion how is law firm going help? How is this attorney going to get our shares magically trading? TY
Very scary thought. And for that I think everybody should chill. But what do I know?
This Megas email seems to allude to that. But maybe it's much more complicated than that.
---->http://www.investorshub.com/boards/read_msg.asp?message_id=19173354
"a percentage of any other damages recovered"
I don't get it. What sort damages is this 'task force' even seeking? Certainly more than our original investments, right?
Ohbull, according to this meagsmail, it sounds to me that the DTC was at least partly negligent in the playing out of the fraud, no?
>>>>"the dtc had accepted as the transfer agent on the basis of her badly counterfeited pacific transfer letter."
But that was only for the first batch counterfeits (I think). Yet why would Sytner have to step in to prove whether or not the certs were counterfeit? Isn't that the DTC's job? In other words, aren't they suppose to check BEFORE they're officially deposited? The DTC is a clearing house. How could they be so blind? And it is THEY that have been holding up the Jan 16th share exchange. I just don't get it.
"he said he couldn't do it"
Do what? Countersue?
It's hard to believe that any attorney would suggest a countersuit in this case. I was just wondering if the countersuits will be dropped when this is ruled in our favor. In other words, it will be silly to sue the man that we all have to reply upon.
Oops, that question was for anybody to answer. Didn't mean to respond to Molsen.
Question: if the suit gets thrown out, or the judgment is ruled in our favor, do the counter-suits get dismissed as well?
No. I believe, and somebody please correct me if I'm wrong, the only people listed as defendants are the ones who currently hold shares in their accounts (ie. as of 8/31/05 when we all got trapped). I have yet to see a post here from anybody who closed out their entire position prior.
Very interesting. Thank you.
Yes, please do. I really appreciate it. Just that added part is fine. Thanks!
Did you add or delete anything major to it? Anything noteworthy?
Yeah I was working with it last night, and I think it'll do the trick. Can't imagine why it wouldn't. I'm starting to think that a lawyer will be a waste, but if he'll look at yours for free that's great.
So the cusip will not change to x205 but we'll be able to trade on along with the legit shares? Is this what you two are saying?
Woohoo! Thanks Ohbull!
Art, you are actually seeing the x205 in your account online, right? Can I ask how you are able to see this?
Yes, I'm up in Boulder County. I received my summons on Wed, and I'm still debating whether to have a lawyer help me write my response. Have you considered finding one? Maybe we could split the cost or something.
You are are so full of it. You haven't even spoken to an attorney have you?
Texbanker, why don't you get a lawyer to help you sort this out, so you can relax and leave the board alone? Okay?
You are arguing the same thing over and over, and frankly I don't think you have clue.
There will be NO dilution when/if our shares are validated! The dilution already happened when the fraudulent shares entered the market and were snatched up by us. By validating our shares nothing happens to the share structure. Having us (new) shareholders has added an enormous amount of market capital, and potential for a enormous short squeeze. Why would Megas or the March Indy's NOT want that???
Ok, thank you. Just trying to see the 'Megas is against us' point of view here. I have not read through the summons yet, but I'll consider that this might be the case when I do. As of right now I have not been made aware (from this board) of anything we could possibly be guilty of, and I believe Megas and his lawyer(s) drew up the case with intention of losing (at least against the vast majority). Why? To prove something as means of getting our shares exchanged. Of course if Megas loses the judgment, in actuality he wins market capital.
I see. So, you think even though we are truly innocent of the charges you think we'll lose the judgment. Hmmmmmm.
Volume coming in again.
Don't you mean judgement 'for them' not 'against them' (meaning Megas loses). I just don't follow your logic here. Unless you are talking about March Indy shareholders?
'Hot grill'? What have you or I done wrong? Brokers sue US? You gotta be kidding.
Most likely not, but the people who fail to respond to the summons, may remain on the list of the defendants, and therefore possibly excluded from trading (if that even happens). Just my guess. Do you you think BCIT can hold ALL of defendants as a group guilty b/c several people fail to respond? I just can't picture that happening, but that's just my opinion.