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.
Hey I was reading RB and found this. Awesome if true
By: averageinvestoraz
06 May 2007, 01:08 AM EDT
Msg. 44107 of 44155
Jump to msg. #
Declaratory Judgment was made NULL and VOID by BCIT/Megas when they dismissed Counts #2 - #5.
By Dismissing Claims #2 - #5 they abrogated Paragraphs 1 and 2 of their PETITION. With Paragraphs 1 and 2 abrogated paragraphs 3 and 4 have nothing to be based on.
So they just abrogated their WHOLE Petition.
And Without any Petition, they have NOTHING to base claims on, Hence they just abrogated their WHOLE CLAIM.
oops
I have been saying all along that some have got the NSS problem morphed into this lawsuit against us for fraud. You are right, they are not related.
Uh, cause megas sued me?
Innocence is not exclusive to either group. Pretty much a given for any individual sued in this case who bought through a broker.
I am familiar with this problem. It may be what ails bcit stock. May be why it was halted. So what? I am being sued for securities fraud and so are you. We are not naked short sellers. The suit and what you speak are not equivalent to me. This is where the great leap of logic is among the faithful and the doubters.
The faithful have little to support their optimism though imo. They have general newclips about naked shorting, they have megasmail, they have faith. The doubters have actual legal documents, real attorney discussions about the law and their real world options, and prior experience with penny ceos.
Anyone figure out how to make our brokers give us tradeable stock? Will we get a megasmail on that soon?
Diversion? Answer the question. I said I wasnt.
Are you going to sign the letter to give back shares?
Suing for defamation? When did I advise that? That would be as nutty as suing electronic s/h for mail fraud. Sanctions are possible though.
ff, brokers have insurance for this type of thing. How then are they screwed?
Where is the proof of this? Megas's own attorneys letter which is posted on here verbatim asks you to give up the stock to get dismissed from the suit. That gets the brokers off the hook. That action by BCIT is helping the brokers imo. So how are some posters helping brokers? I for one don't want to sign that fricken letter.
You left off those who are p.....o.. they were sued for fraud by BCIT.
The devils in the details.
so you would think... BCIT announced a share exchnge last winter.. the brokers never did it..
are you beginning to see why he was forced to file the suit now?
Let me state a fact here. I contacted my broker several times after the share exchange was announced. They told me they received nothing from the company or its TA regarding the exchange. They stated to me that once they did, they would move forward.
Maybe only he knows what they are , cause he made them himself? LOL
Dude I hate to break it to you but our shares are toast. Just read the letter.
AHHA! But then, how would we get all your shares invalidated!
Oh a big mystery defendant eh? He should have sued them then.
Let me ask you, are you signing the letter? What are your other options? You going up against megas? How you going to rope your broker into it? You have an attorney?
ROTFLMAO. Dog, you and ohbull going to sign this? No? What you all going to do then?
Brokers are not on the hook right now. Once on, they will probably just give the original investment back. No way they are going to suck down millions in losses to cover for this mess. Anyone who thinks otherwise are dreaming. Get an honest job or buy a lottery ticket. IMHO of course.
"Holy fake certs Batman! Of course, the perfect crime. Counterfeit shares in your own company with a known shady character. Distribute them and let it trade for awhile and then BAM send out a PR saying they are fakes out there, everyone stop trading. Trading goes on for a while before Commissioner Gordon gets wind of it, while you rake in the loot. Cry croc tears and say you were hijacked. Sue the shady character, to get everyone off the trail, but then in the end,let him off the hook. Setting up the big one. Sue your company's own shareholders for having the fake certs and get the stock voided. Reduces the shares outstanding, issue more for sale. Lather. Rinse. Repeat."
"Quick mind, Robin. To the Batcave!"
This one's is still a rubicks cube in play. Either someones a james bond bad guy type genius who hasnt shown his hand yet or totally nuts. Fine line between genius and insanity. lol
Are you one of the bashers they speak of on here?
the dtcc or the debbil?
I didn't mean you and the naked -short- I'm- going -to- get -rich -boiz.
Where is the rationale? Where is the sense in all this? I have yet to read anyone on here who really has the understanding other than megas wanted to try for some easy money. Of course now he's dropped the penalty request. It stands now as wanting a declaratory judgement against shareholders who bought through brokers. Thats the target now. Its the road to go down to find the real strategy. Why do it? What does it prove? How does it help megas, bcit, s/h? To me, now as it stands, the suit just asks to remove these shares and cleans the slate of them. Yes, you have no shares. Then you ask your broker and they give you back the purchase price and say they are done, you are whole. Megas has eliminated a huge pool of stock. He can then issue more shares and start trading again. You see it? I would sue for that possibility. It makes some sense. Worth a shot. One big clue is the letter allowing you to opt out by returning shares. The dropped claims are his recognition that the easy money for judgements wasn't going to work out. Best case in this imo, is you get dropped from the suit and your original stake back.
After all this time, has anyone really figured out why megas sued stockholders?
Seems like he needed to do that in the Pino suit, subpoena that info.
you sound down about it. lol. Luck is luck. Take it and run. You saved $$$ in legal fees.
Glasz, you have to admit this was extremely risky for bcit. Above and beyond reasonable business risk for megas. He's a real dice-roller.
That may be so glasz, there may be naked shorts but imo its not the reason we are not trading and its not a problem for MM's. ITs a problem for the companies affected. Its possibly the fault of hedge funds. So the fault is not with the s/h, the brokers or MM's. Even you admit that in your post. So why sue US?
Exactly, are his shares being claimed fraudulent too? O will he erase ours and his stay? He did appear to sue Synter though. Wierd.
I call it the business of stock trading. The more knowledge you can get of the process, the more you realize that even if there are naked shares out there, its not a problem for a MM. They simply do what they do. Short on the way up, buy to cover on the way down and make their margin. How high can it go? Well probably not as high as before a s/h lawsuit was filed. But as high as it goes dog. What I am saying is your broker or mine don't care as the price doesnt really impact them if they are making market. I mean think about the net stocks of years past. Many nothing companies went up to thousands of percent. Demand was crazy, as much as any naked short situation would be now. You ordered, your brokers bought and the MM shorted on the way way way up and bought on the way way way way down.
Im thinking the beef is between bcit, megas and dtcc. For some reason, megas wants to bring s/h and brokers into it. Is is out of spite to dtcc? Trying to flimflam s/h? any other comments?
I agree. Some online brokers don't have offices in OK.
I don't buy the naked short argument or the brokers don't want to trade it because they are short bs so many go on and on about. MM or brokers are short at times on all stocks, sometimes a lot more than other times. So what? Thats the business. You go short when the price rises, you buy when it falls. Same will happen when bcit trades. The price could go to $100 a share, MM will short it all the way up and sell it all the way down. No different than any other stock. The naked short BS is another tool in the toolbox of the stock promoter to get people to buy the stock thinking there is going to be this huge demand for a buyin. There could be huge demand for a buy in, and the price could skyrocket yes, but the MM or brokers could care less, imo.
The suit imo is so Megas can get rid of s/h and more or less take the company back quasi private by erasing your shares, clean the slate, wait a while, reissue more shares and start the penny game anew. In the meantime, he thought he could overreach and catch a few suckers for fraud penalties. All this is imo and I dont represent any broker or MM and I bought my shares online through a broker as a daytrade and Yes I was sued. And yes Im still extremely PO'ed about it. In case you couldnt tell.
If bcit is going to trade, its going to trade whether we counter sue for our rights or we lay down. I wouldnt combine the two. If anyone can be blamed for slowing down trading, its this stupid suit by the company against shareholders. Plus has anyone brought up who is going to touch this stock, if by some miracle it does trade again? Knowing that the company has sued s/h for fraud from NOBO lists and reserved the right to sue them in the future? Talk about a dog with fleas.
Never got much comfort from the " this aint bad because Ive seen worse" reasoning.
Yep, more sloppy lawyering. Amazing given the rep of the plaintiff firm. Must be one of the juniors on the case.
Hey average investor. great minds think alike. Props to you dude. Don't foret the damages. Hmmm, I could use a public shell. LOL