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.
Jim, I think you might be a little bit out there:-
National Association Of Securities Dealers (NASD)
A nonprofit membership organization registered with the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) under the provisions of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934. Membership is limited and consists mostly of broker-dealers and investment banking houses. Basic goals of the NASD are to:
Promote just and equitable principles of trade for the protection of investors;
Adopt, oversee, and enforce rules of fair practice;
Consult with government and investors on matters of common concern;
Conduct periodic examinations and audits to ensure solvency and financial integrity among members.
This is directed to all not gkc1234. I have been wondering why no one here has thought to put forward all the 'research'done on this company and what it has turned up to NASD?
It could be suggested to them that, in the light of the most generous, on the surface, special dividend, surely it calls for some investigation to invite assurances from the company that all is well.
I mean, what use is a watchdog that can't at least bare it's teeth a little before the event. Why wait until the damage has been done.
There appears to be a number of interpretations of the initials
HSM. what has HSM to do with IDWD? Has a Microsoft engineer really quoted IDWD in any connection with his company? Sure?
How about- HLS that also has a number of associations unrelated to IDWD.
Is this company part of IDWD:-
About Us
HLS Systems, Inc. is a small company with three employees. We've got your requisite President, George Smith; the Financial Officer, Jim Lillard, and the Secretary of our corporation, Don Hunt.
We deal one-on-one with our customers and suppliers to construct each custom-computing platform with care using quality components.
We've been in this business since 1991, starting the company as a part-time project while we were also working full-time for a major aerospace company located in Aurora, CO. Kept us really busy!
Each of us brings to our customers the ability to provide custom PCs, create custom database applications, or to build entire web sites or e-Stores specific to their needs. We are also Intel Channel Partners and Microsoft System Builders, which translates into great products that will meet your most demanding needs.
Our computer experience dates back to 1962, when George was.......
Their address is in Colorado.
There are others.
Incidentlly I have written to GWGO (Great West Gold) twice to ask them why anyone could hope to gain from shorting their shares when they are paying special dividends of supposedly valueable shares.
((I'm still not clear Mike how those naked short sellers,
and/or the broker, could come up with the shares that would be due to all who are holding those additional shares created by the shorters. Cash I could understand)
So far I have had no response from GWGO. I'll pass it on if I do.
Thanks Mark, that does throw a bit more light on the matter.
I did read on a blog site, that if you are invested in a company crying that naked shorts are hitting their stock and that is why it is suffering - then get out fast. It is almost certain that it is an excuse by the company for other failings, such as diluting its own shares.
This would fall in with what Janice has said. It also would make your explanation Mark have substance. Naked shorters would be very careful where they practised - certainly not on companies that were sound, and could recover easily, or that were about to pay out a decent dividend - stock or cash.
Thanks again to all who responded and cleared some air.
Mark, I appreciate your imput. But you say:-
"...This is incorrect. There is no difference as far as the company's books are concerned between a share which is shorted naked and one shorted with a borrow. In fact, many shares which are shorted naked eventually find a borrow, and many shares which are shorted with a borrow eventually fail...".
What is getting to me is if, by the naked shorting an extra two or three million shares are out there. I mean someone has to buy for the transaction to be complete. Then, when the company comes to pay out the dividend, it can only pay out to what itself has issued, and is registered on its books.
In this case, two or three million would be screaming 'where's my dividend'. Yes/no?
Crossbow, I understand perfectly how short selling works, I've done it. My query was on so called NAKED shorting. I pointed out that these could NOT be on the companies books.
My query was on how naked shorting (which could not be done by
ordinary people) could work on companies that payed out a dividend - especially a large one like a 'special', especially of shares.
I mean, someone has to buy those 'naked' (not on the register)
shares and would be expecting that dividend (cash or shares).
My query was set out very clearly, and I gave an example.
So please don't anyone tell me about regular, accepted, 'shorting'. My query is about NAKED shorts.
Thanks for your response anyway. At least you tried even if you were off beam.
'Not having won' does not mean that it isn't done, by a long way. It can mean that it is hard to pin on the offenders, that they are people who can bury their tracks and hire the right defence if suspected. Remember they could not nail the short sellers just before 9/11.
Thanks Janice. At least that sounds a logical possibility to be considered. However, they (Gwgo) are really taking steps beyond that of just screaming. They have been motivated by the new legislation.
What guy? You too have got me foxed on how your reply relates to my question. My question was simple. How can naked shorting work when the company shorted pays a dividend - especially a large one, and of shares?
Please explain to me how your reply relates to this (below) post of mine? I've tried in vein to tie it up.
This post was a response to one that Justerex posted. I do seek a specific answer which I hoped someone would supply. But it appears no one knows.That's OK, I will try elsewhere.
You (meaning Justerex) have not really answered my question. I understand the argument against 'naked' short selling.
I can understand it working on companies that provide no return to their shareholders. But how do they get round those companies that decide to pay out something to their
shareholders - cash or shares?
You have a traded company. You issue a billion shares. Therefore there are shareholders registered on your books to cover that billion shares.
Now naked shorts start floating (dumping) on the market that add up to two billion. That extra billion cannot be on your register without you being aware.
You are issuing as a special dividend $1 per share for every share held. That would have been budgeted as costing one billion dollars. What happens to those extra one billion holding shares?
What am I missing? Obviously something, but what?
You have not really answered my question. I understand the argument against 'naked' short selling.
I can understand it working on companies that provide no return to their shareholders. But how do they get round those companies that decide to pay out something to their shareholders - cash or shares?
You have a traded company. You issue a billion shares. Therefore there are shareholders registered on your books to cover that billion shares.
Now naked shorts start floating (dumping) on the market that add up to two billion. That extra billion cannot be on your register without you being aware.
You are issuing as a special dividend $1 per share for every share held. That would have been budgeted as costing one billion dollars. What happens to those extra one billion holding shares?
What am I missing? Obviously something, but what?
"How does a Naked Short Hedge fund cover a restricted dividend?
That does seem to be the elephant in the room"
Not sure if this is what you are meaning, Justerx, but I have often thought this by those who claim heavy 'naked' shorting, which is said to extend way beyond the 'pink sheets' - how is it (the manipulation, the wrong doing)not uncovered (or, literally, covered)at dividend time - especially large 'special divdend'time if many people are holding more shares than those issued by the company?
Great West Gold (GWGO) has just paid out a 25% dividend in shares of a number (five)of its gold companies which are now to float on their own. Yet, GWGO is on record (see internet)as being so plagued by 'naked' shorts it is taking action against them under new rulings.
This company has been trading over a billion shares each day for the last two days. It is also to pay out more shares to its shareholders next month. Remember it has ALREADY paid out one lot, and the shareholders have received them (as I noted from RB site)
So, again, what happens to the millions of shareholders holding those 'created out of thin air' (virtual reality) shares? The company will/can only pay out to those on their books from shares issued legally.
'Enlighten' me,anyone, don't take my 'nom-de-plume', too literally - it's more of a 'wish to be'.
Which, Janice, is exactly what I told them as detailed in that post
In fact, this is what told me a lot about them and their mind-set. Also it told me the real purpose of the site and upon how it failed miserably on all counts.
Just an observation that may or may not apply here.
"....Oil companies, hotels, equipment suppliers, and cellular service, etc, that do business in unstable regions will often have a 60/40 relationship. It decreases risk for the American
Company and provides a financial interest for the Muslim community......"
I am getting the feeling that the 'unstable' countries are more stable than IDS. I don't get the feeling that IDS is a philanthropic company whose raison d'etre is to help out the less fortunates of this world. Of course, I could be wrong. I can only judge by how things have been conducted, and what I have seen myself from their websites. It's a kind of intuition.
As previously stated, I went in, then ducked out - at a very slight profit. Had I held on a bit longer, my profit would have been greater. I may finish up really kicking myself.
However, what will always stick in my mind is a guy who was one of our small group that used to attend the office of a discount broker back in 87, in Boca Raton. They provided a row of computers for us to monitor and make our trades with a group of brokers behind a screened counter who made instant trades for us.
We were there on on the Monday of the 'big dive'. Well this guy came in around lunch time with an ashen face (unusual to see in Florida).
He had heard the news, we had all heard, and also his broker had called him to tell him he had had to sell him out. I remember him telling me he had just called his son to tell him there would be nothing to expect when he passed on (he was well into retirement age)
He had built up a portfolio over two or three years amounting to $3-4 million. In half a day he was back to square one.
Moral? Well you all know it. It's not yours 'till its in your bank. You can be a millionaire, on paper, for a year or two, and its taken away from you in seconds.
Even if you are not on margin, you can still see your profit wiped out on the last minute. The only difference is - you still have the shares for what they are worth. But today, you can't even have the beautifully engraved certificates to paper your den wall, or to sell to the scripophily collectors. (Do many still exist?)
My only thought has been - is he planning to make this really work, and to keep faith for some ulterior motive that we haven't figured out yet. Any imaginative ideas?
"....IDS is currently active in such MAJOR growth segments, as Biometric Security, Outsourcing, Bio-Medical Products, Entertainment (CD/DVD manufacturing and packaging), Sporting Goods, Nationwide Security operations, Offshore Plastic Product Manufacturing, International Sales, Call Centers, and US Based Order Fulfillment for Infomercial based marketing campaigns......."
It started a mere 7 years ago. What sound business mind would have started a company with such a diverse sphere of operations
and involving a number of different countries? How could you hope to stay focused to bring one of them to fruition - a case of 'jack of all trades, master of none'.
In spite of all the adverse comment here, it is these 'known' facts which struck me most when I was looking at how such a company could honour such a proposed deal as sharing out to its shareholders ALL the profits from the sale(?)of its only really valuable core business.
Then I looked at this other stated 'winner'995AD'. Before I even tried to find anything (with no success but a lot of frustration)I was totally unimpressed by everything about it - even a young starter in website design could have done far better.
Someone really interested in having a viable business would have used far more imagination, or employed the services of someone who could' The message it sends doesn't just shout - it screams.
When I pointed out to them the difficulty of finding ANYTHING, and of its presentation and format, they replied:-
"....This was necessary to stop abuses of the site from
people selecting all while not really interested in finding a car but just trying to see the total number of cars of the site......"
I replied to them, for which they offered no further answer:-
A good ethical site should never be concerned about how many people try to check it. If I wanted to advertise there, I would also wish to check it out. A restaurant should never be worried about a patron wanting to see in the kitchen. So I am sorry, your explanation holds no water.
However, your prime concern appears to be stop 'just lookers' instead of making things easier for the genuine customer.
We should run our professions, businesses, and governments in a transparent manner
Secrecy, and subterfuge invite suspicion. And, not unstrangely, that suspicion under those
circumstances usually turns out to be well founded.
The other cliche that rings in my ears in this current 'age of scam'- in the UK we are warned daily by the media of how the world is alive with scams of all types and sizes which appear to operate with wild abandon and total immunity is - 'If it sounds too good to be true, then it almost certainly is'
And, of course - 'Caveat Emptor'
Wasn't the share out to shareholders of IDS from the money received from the sale of HLS (being a one off payment)?
Any future dividends from HLS to the shareholders will go to those who buy HLS when it is a separate viable company and to IDS company (for the shares holding it retains of HLS from the deal).
The shareholders of IDS (you if you hold any)would only benefit(from HLS) if those profits contribute to IDS sufficiently for them to pay out a dividend (if and when they wish to).
This is how it appears to me at this time. Or am I wrong in my assumption?
It only appears difficult to those who lack imagination.
I have read all this stuff up years ago. The Internet, that wondeful source of information, abounds with contributions from those far more erudite in the sciences than I.
Here is the start of one such contribution: This is not the website for developing this sort of discussion, so you must seek out the rest if you are interested.
The Priority Myth
Excerpts from Chapter One
"It is easily proven that Albert Einstein did not originate the special theory of relativity in its entirety, or even in its majority.1 The historic record is readily available. Ludwig Gustav Lange,2 Woldemar Voigt,3 George Francis FitzGerald,4 Joseph Larmor,5 Hendrik Antoon Lorentz,6 Jules Henri Poincaré,7 Paul Drude,8 Paul Langevin,9 and many others, slowly developed the theory, step by step, and based it on thousands of years of recorded thought and research.
Einstein may have made a few contributions to the theory, such as the relativistic equations for aberration and the Doppler-Fizeau Effect,10 though he may also have rendered an incorrect equation for the transverse mass of an electron, which, when corrected, becomes Lorentz' equation.11
Albert Einstein's first work on the theory of relativity did not appear until 1905. There is substantial evidence that Albert Einstein did not write this 1905 paper12 on the "principle of relativity" alone. His wife, Mileva Einstein-Marity, may have been co-author, or the sole author, of the work.13....................."
. . in 1927, H. Thirring wrote,
"H. Poincare had already completely solved the problem of time several years before the appearance of Einstein's first work (1905). . . ." 48
FOG OF WAR: "......It's known to be the main reason why he was more successful even as a podunk university graduate....."
Or may be, as many believe, and can throw up circumstancial evidence to support - he was just a clever plagiarist, and that he was fed the 'imagination and knowledge' of others by
a network with which he was associated.
In life, all is rarely what it seems - not just among the pink sheets, large company boardrooms, or the dark recesses or governments.
"Einstein also said that imagination is more important than knowledge"
So, we should stop wasting time and energy seeking the knowledge of whether IDS and its wonder dividend is for real.
Lets just imagine it is. Imagine that house will be yours in March, and that on the 17th with your imagination, and the luck of the Irish, you will be rolling in 'the green'.
All you have to do is borrow to the hilt, and grab those shares
while they are still at this price. (My tongue's in my cheek)
It is one of the many quotes of Einstein I have always had a problem agreeing with. I know the great importance of imagination but I believe that you really need the knowledge
to do anything with it. In fact, doesn't imagination need to draw from knowledge. Well, it's one that could keep an argument going for a long time - a bit like the hen and the egg.
Hope you get your house, it looks a beauty.
Dear Janice, and to ALL. I am amazed at how anyone could have misread my post. While there was irony in much of it, it was not my intention to 'fool' anyone. That thought NEVER entered my head. There are many shades of all kinds of humour - even slapstick, and I deliberately used a VERY mild shade.
The point I was making, in simple terms, was to present two contrasting scenarios relating to IDS, and that if either were correct then I am surprised that the company's offer
hasn't caused even a greater stir than it it has.
This being because the offer, if it were legit, would be the greatest opportunity for a quick buck in a lifetime.
I then proceeded to illustrate mathematically what its return
on capital would be. Then, with tongue in cheek (which you couldn't see but should have deduced from the rest) indicated
that (if it were true) it would be worth taking out a large loan for, especially for such a short time)
Such an unbelievable offer from its 'too good to be true'aspect should, therefore, have caused a stir in the 'watchdog', even investigative financial journalist' camps
that would have exposed it for what it 'appears to be'- a scam, OR - revealed the back-up truth and closed any 'exit doors' for its CEO if he then, after the event, tried to wriggle out of the deal. (It would have helped to slam the prison doors on him afterwards)
Obviously, I would not have expected any such seasoned veterans as those who come here to have sold the family silver and mortgaged the country seat, even if the watchdogs
had said that the offer was viable. (And I expected all to be intelligent enough not to have seen that without further explanation).
Because, as we all know, there is always sod's law (as well as false promises and scams), and the only absolutely sure thiing in life is - that one day we will die.
(though Einstein believed that the continuing stupidity of man was a pretty sure thing)
That is an honest explanation to clear the air, and one that I had never, for one second, thought I would need to give.
My post was wholly about IDS. You misread it and made sarcastic comment. I responded. I am absolutely unconcerned about what impresses you. That is for you and close friends and family.
Now, can we keep to IDS.
Please give me an example - but please place it in its full context.
How can one who has difficulty reading, and jumps to a conclusion without understanding make such a judgement. I did go to the trouble explaining what it is.
If you feel I have erred, don't make sarcastic comment, please inform me of your version of irony.
As for Monty Python, which was probably way over your head from what you say, was presented and written by very educated and intelligent people. They didn't get to university
by being good at sports which is unheard of in the UK, and I would hazard a guess - in Europe.
Its style of humour is to make a point by poking fun at the often incongruity of reality in a less than transparent way by keeping a straight, and serious, face (real, or in writing - metaphorically).
Most British humour('most' does not mean all so don't go telling me about Benny Hill, though he did use it sometimes along with Chaplinesk humour)is centred on the use of irony, so I do understand, when others, not so weaned have a problem with it and take things far too literally and out of context.
I await your lucid explanation of irony with anxious anticipation. I am always ready to be enlightened.
Janice. Do me the favour of reading my post properly if you are going to comment. And, a word about irony which seems to be above your head as it is said of so many Americans. It is connected to absurdity, incongruity, facetiousness,sarcasm, mockery -as used by Monty Python.
Now how many went out after reading my post, as Janice said, and mortgaged their home, and plunged it in IDWD shares? Come on own up, stand up and be counted.
Janice, you too can't read a post properly? Stop letting your eyes only see bits. Look at the context. I mean if that particular post led you to a wrong conclusion because you didn't read what I was saying, I drove it home quite bluntly in two or three posts afterwards.
At least, now I know why so many get hold of the wrong tale, you come to conclusions, and sprout them, without understanding.
This makes one think that you can so easily do this when giving your views on a company.
Isn't there a song that goes - "Do you believe in miracles...."
I believe there is enough 'meat' here for an investigative financial journalist to seek out the truth, even to find out whether the company could even deliver the goods if it intended to.
No company, whether on pink sheets,yellow sheets, or red white and blue sheets should be permitted to propose, and publicise, a specific offer that it has not the financial ability to meet. If there is a justified reason why all the details cannot be published to the public at a given time, it should be demanded to be proved to the 'watchdog' authorities.
If only 25% of the concerns raised here have substance they should have warranted some serious investigation.
Intention to pay up is one thing, known inability is another.
Why ask me? In this little lot, I am an 'unenlightened one'.At least on the legitimacy of the offer, and the company. If you had read my posts, I mean really read them, you would have known that.
Investorman, are you incapable of understanding irony? I have heard it said that many Americans are. If you are one of those, then I understand. I suggest you read it again, and not select a portion out of context because that is all you see, for the purpose of an opportunity of making cynical comment.
I wasn't even saying you should, or should not, invest, a penny.
Can anyone tell me what causes certain lines to jump a line within a sentence when submitting the post? To understand what I mean, if you will notice in my last post, just before this, the sentence is broken up by it moving to the next line before the end of the line has been reached.
Maybe it just happens when I have prepared it in Word or some other place. However, it is always correct when I copy it.
If you can - thanks. If not, no sweat.
This is not a reply to 'chuckermfla's post but I could not see
how to send an independent one.
My post here is an observation of this, to me, interesting on going saga of a 'pink panther' of a stock that appears to slip in and out of dicey questioning comment with confident ease and inscrutable smirk.
Some feel it has attracted more comment than it warrants.
I can't understand why it hasn't attracted more. Why?
Because, if it is for real, it is one of the greatest money making opportunities of a lifetime. If it is not, then it is an obvious scam that by its 'far too good to be true 'Ex Ante', exposure, should have warranted close scrutiny by
the 'watchdog' authorities, and even serious delving into by some impartial investigative journalist.
Think of it. Read again, or remember, my earlier post in which it was very emphatically stated IN WRITING (no ifs and buts) that there would be NO Reverse Split, and that not only would the dividend's value be met, but even believed BETTER than stated, and that non-believers would eat crow (this last bit not in those exact words, but to that effect)
That means, on March 17th next - just a mere four weeks away, you could more than double your investment immediately, plus still hold shares in what has got to be a viable venture in order to be in a position to do such a thing.
You could take out a loan, second mortgage on your home, for say $250,000 dollars and for this you would get 625,000 shares
(at .40c a share) So in or about just four weeks you would receive, at least, $687,000 dollars (625,000X $1.10. You pay off your loan and you are left with just under half a million.
You also have the shares to boot, to keep or sell. If they eventually moved up to a dollar - well, if the company keep faith with this dividend, why should not the rest be believed,
you are made for life.
That we, or anyone should be doubtful, is highly understandable. That it has not caused even a greater stir I find difficult to understand.
Not quite sure what you mean, however, I am certain that an apt, and truthful reply would be that - 'it is you'.
I have already said in an earlier post (I think) that I am a Brit, and I have been fortunate to have received a reasonably good education. So, if that is what you are referring to,
maybe it will explain.
As I have said, I am not familiar with the photo,other than on this site, and I do not know who, or what, Datatech is.
That's all I can say. My comments re IDS were neither for, nor against, because I just don't know, but their offer appears fantastic, if they do deliver,
I told you I sold out this morning at 39 (They snapped my hand off for them) Later it dropped to 36 and I was so thankful I had dumped (so felt smug) Now they are at 43 so - don't feel to happy.
IDS are obviously, and with good reason, very concerned about this and other sites which have been highlighting, whether truthfully or otherwise, concerns (and I use that term loosely)about their company, in particular to where it relates to this (you have to admit,if real)unbelieveable, 'special dividend'.
One's impetuous, at times, desire to make a quick buck is, naturally tempered by the valid cliche - 'If it sounds too good to be true, it usually is'. If that doesn't spell high caution - it should.
However, I will now reveal that on Friday last,I made a token purchase of 2000 shares at 37. They had dropped at one time to
32 but were moving back up towards the close.
I grew very uneasy over the weekend reading many comments, and also from researching their touted income sites.
I personally could not find any cars, or hotel accommodations no matter how many options I tried. I could find no reference on the internet to the Pakistan large retail outlet quoted in their press release.
I brought these concerns to the company, and, in fairness, I got quick responces over the weekend to all my communications. Some of my concerns were not addressed, but ones relating to their websites were, and they admitted that the hotel accommodation still left much to
be desired.
I have posted, a little earlier, for you the response which gave the most assurances as to the proposed dividend.
However, first thing on opening of the market this morning, I saw the share price was 38 on the bid, and 40 on the ask. I put a sell order in at 39. It was accepted almost IMMEDIATELY
I was even, if necessary, prepared to take a small loss in order to get out. However, as you can see, I made a small profit. (my commission costs are very low)
In my posts, I have tried to give anyone interested in this company, in particular, or the workings of some of these companies listed in shark infested waters in general, an honest account of my experience.
What's the bottom line, the conclusion, I don't know. Is IDS legit, in other words? I don't know.
I guess its a case of 'you pays your money, you takes your chance.' I suppose it takes a special kind of stomach for these things. I am not sure my digestive tract is up to it.
Anyway, St Pat's day isn't far away, when all will be revealed.
Thanks for all your input.
I have today received the following e-mail from ID to whom I had expressed my concerns. Make of it what you will:-
"IDS only regret will be that anybody reading the biased postings with no facts will either sell their stock at a loss and/or not purchase for the dividend.
First, there will absolutely be NO REVERSE SPLIT, secondly the blatant lies that IDS has printed millions of shares is deflated by the fact that the outstanding share are millions less than before IDS took over the public company.
Finally, IDS seriously doubts any of these posters, who
again with no facts, have stated the dividend will be in some worthless pink sheet shell, will repay anyone's losses who listened to their drivel when the dividend is paid.
IDS is extremely confident the value of the dividend
will not only meet the value stated in the company's press releases but far exceed it.
One must ask why some posters have nothing but time to post
hundreds of times a week to bash a stock they don't own and anyone believing they are just there to the investing public a service should not be investing in stocks.
On many occassions IDS has been approached by the
posters and hedge fund puppets stating "they would stop negative posting if IDS gave them blocks of discounted Free Trading Shares". IDS does not bow to hedge funds, their puppet poster or daytraders wishes.
In reply to one of your earlier concerns find attached a search conducted in the last hour on 995ad.com car section and a report from Google IDS has previously sent other
investors showing 995ad.com car section average ranking when searching for USED CARS and/or CARS FOR SALE is 2.2 position. Read attachement for actual
printouts."
IDS Investor Relations