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.
If this is true (and I don't know this law), it is a HUGE point in favor of GS. Maybe Tuesday was a trap being laid by the GS team. If so, it worked perfectly. They got lots of "information" and the company hid in waiting. Time to spring the trap.
On that we agree.
40+M shares are not "thin" to .0015! Lol!
Goldman Sachs probably still has word on the street to make the OTC bleed for the GME and BB fiasco. When you poke the lion, shit happens. What everyone should do is just stop trading the entire market for a month, go on a trading strike, then see who those shitheads have to manipulate . . . Would be very interesting indeed.
Yes. I was pointing out that CDEL seems to always have unlimited shares whenever a move starts, in part, to HFT machinations. Every time the ask moves up, they suddenly show up with tens of millions of shares - I'm wondering now if someone may not be setting them up, knowing their HFT ploys. Would be nice to see a 50M at several points above the ask to wipe out the bullshit.
Your explanation?
Once again, CDEL has unlimited shares at whatever price "he" needs to - no wonder the SEC is investigating the company.
Doubled my position. Too easy to miss. I'm glad the price dropped, but sorry for those who got duped into selling.
So no imcompetence on his part, just a difference of corporate philosophy - makes sense to me.
So much positivity here. So much to look forward to. So much good being done for the customers who need/want the products. So much good will come to the stock holders who have the faith and patience to wait. In the stock market, none of us ever KNOW what is really going on - we do our DD and make our best guess based on what we read and hear (which may or may not be true - everyone has an agenda). So many sales reps out selling the product, and I can only imagine how large that number will be when they open Africa and the U.S. The fact that they are opening Africa tells you a few things that escape our everyday notice, especially that Africa has a growing middle class. Hmmm. Easy to overlook when stereotypes from the 19th century still exist (as in most Africans are tribal bush people). All IMHO only.
Please! Impressions are extremely sujective. You have no way of knowing what the judge's impressions were.
Totally irrelevant objections. Over-ruled! Lol
Monday will be interesting, to say the least.
The die is cast in George's favor. If the custodianship is granted this will roar back to new highs and beyond. If it is not GS still has other plays to secure his reputation. He don't need to win all or even many. The money will be made.
Admiral, adamirable post. I agree.
The judge asked about a, but the real key is:
Yes. TSN*P was a HUGE success. Do you dispute that? Who cares HOW he won it. It made not a few millionaires.
About the "controller":
She did an admirable job of speaking in generalities about the position of "controller' - where she was lost was on the specifics of THIS company. Additionally, she stated that if GS wins custodianship she would leave, on the presumption that GS would take the company in a direction of which she did not approve. Assuming GS actually wins this custodianship, and given his success with the last one he developed, this seems to be an admission that 12 Retch does not have much business in its 15 subsidiaries. If this "big goal" all 12 of them have been working on is so valuable, I'm sure GS could see the value and get on board. Of course SHE is part of the reason why the company failed to maintain its corporate status and fell delinquint.
The elephant in the room is the fact that GS was already awarded custodianship by the judge earlier. The company is arguing from a seriously handicapped position giving its recent actions. Why did they suddenly come up with the money to reinstate ONLY after being sued? Let's suppose GS doesn't sue - is RETC paying to reinstate and jumping through hoops to get current . . . Or are they still excusing their lack of action due to preserving cash AND the pandemic with the stock stuck in trips?
Nice article. Thanks for sharing. Looks like Delarge has a strong capitalist strek in him.
Currently #9 on Breakout Boards
The Nevada Statute; make of it what you will.
Sec. 78.347
Application by stockholder for order of court appointing custodian or receiver; requirements of custodian; authority of custodian; adoption of regulations by Secretary of State.
1.
Any stockholder may apply to the district court to appoint one or more persons to be custodians of the corporation, and, if the corporation is insolvent, to be receivers of the corporation when:
(a)
The business of the corporation is suffering or is threatened with irreparable injury because the directors are so divided respecting the management of the affairs of the corporation that a required vote for action by the board of directors cannot be obtained and the stockholders are unable to terminate this division; or
(b)
The corporation has abandoned its business and has failed within a reasonable time to take steps to dissolve, liquidate or distribute its assets in accordance with this chapter.
2.George Must Provide
An applicant on whose behalf a stockholder has applied to the district court for a custodianship pursuant to subsection 1 shall provide the following information, along with an affidavit attesting that such information is true and correct, to the district court:
(a)
A detailed list of all previous applications to a court in any jurisdiction for a custodianship of a publicly traded corporation that were filed by the applicant or an affiliate or subsidiary of the applicant.
(b)
If an application listed in paragraph (a) was approved, a detailed description of the activities performed during the custodianship by the applicant or the affiliate or subsidiary of the applicant.
(c)
A description of the current corporate status and business operation of any publicly traded corporation for which the applicant and any affiliate or subsidiary of the applicant has held a custodianship.
(d)
A full disclosure of any and all previous criminal, administrative, civil or National Association of Securities Dealers, Inc., or Securities and Exchange Commission investigations, violations or convictions concerning the applicant and any affiliate or subsidiary of the applicant.
(e)
Evidence of reasonable efforts by the applicant to contact the officers and directors of the corporation for which the custodianship is sought.
(f)
Evidence of a demand by the applicant to the officers and directors of the corporation for which the custodianship is sought that the corporation comply with the provisions of this chapter and that the applicant did not receive a response.
3.Once George Wins Custodianship
The district court shall order any applicant who is granted custodianship pursuant to this section to:
(a)
Comply with the provisions of NRS 78.180 or 80.170, as applicable. The custodian shall submit evidence of compliance with this paragraph to the district court.
(b)
Provide reasonable notice to all shareholders of record of a shareholder meeting to be held within a reasonable time after an application for custodianship or receivership has been granted. The custodian shall submit evidence of compliance with this paragraph to the district court.
(c)
Provide the district court with a report of the actions taken at the shareholder meeting noticed by the custodian.
(d)
Provide the district court with periodic reports, at intervals to be determined by the court, of the activities of the custodian and the board of directors and the progress of the corporation.
(e)
Provide any other information deemed necessary by the court.
4.
Within 10 days after being appointed custodian of a Nevada publicly traded corporation, the custodian shall file with the Secretary of State an amendment to the articles of incorporation containing the following information:
(a)
Disclosures of any previous criminal, administrative, civil or National Association of Securities Dealers, Inc., or Securities and Exchange Commission investigations, violations or convictions concerning the custodian and any affiliate of the custodian.
(b)
A statement indicating that:
(1)
Reasonable attempts were made to contact the officers or directors of the corporation to request that the corporation comply with corporate formalities and to continue its business.
(2)
The custodian is in fact continuing the business and attempting to further the interests of the shareholders.
(3)
The custodian will reinstate or maintain the corporate charter.
(c)
Any other information required by regulation to be submitted to the Secretary of State.
5.
The Secretary of State may adopt regulations to administer the provisions of subsection 4.
6.
A custodian appointed pursuant to this section has all the powers and title of a trustee appointed under NRS 78.590, 78.635 and 78.650, but the authority of the custodian is to continue the business of the corporation and not to liquidate its affairs or distribute its assets, except when the district court so orders and except in cases arising pursuant to paragraph (b) of subsection 1.
I think this is the key point that many are missing: is the judge going to rule on what has happened AFTER the lawsuit, or what was NOT happening before the lawsuit? Or will she take into consideration that the company has suddenly started jumping through all the hoops it was ignoring prior to GS filing his petition?
Maybe you had stopped watching the "shitshow" by that point? Appreciate you clarifying that.
So, it's funny that George's mother is in the hospital, which was the reason for the call?
Besides the controller's witness, what evidence do you have that they were a valid, ongoing concern engaged in business and increasing value to shareholders? We have no filings to show that they had been doing anything, and no reason to believe that they will.
So, why did their counsel go out of his way this afternoon to point out that they had paid the fees, "the check has been cashed," and then "breaking news" the fact that they had been reinstated?
Was the corporation abandoned when GS filed for custodianship? There's the critical question. All this pomp and circumstance SINCE the filing is meaningless. What RETC has to show is that it was a valid corporation prior to the filing, which is going to be very difficult given that they had lost corporate status in Nevada. Very difficult indeed.
I think that is exactly George's point: he believes they are unbelievable. No demonstrable filing action or communication to shareholders UNTIL GS filed custodianship. We've all seen the PnD PRs; if you have not, you might consider DEC $N as a case study.
Switching sides? lol
You never say more than you need to until you need to . . .