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.
puppydotcom: Those shares made it to the market already.
Gone. History.
Ouch... Bid back down to .0015, Ask down to .002.
Oops - Make that .0014 x .0015...
Double oops - Back down to .0012 x .0015. Hell, we started the day at .0012 x .002...
beeboymama: You're excited about 900.00 and 300.00 trades?
Clearly nobody can ever claim you're pessimistic about your stock holdings...
Up to .005 on 2.3+M shares?
Bizarre action, up and down...
P.S. Got to .007????
The following e-mail was received by bondmat, a longtime believer in RA, in response to a question about the status of the appeal in the SEC case. This e-mail was posted on the Yahoo! "Un-official" USXP board. It is clear from this response that the receiver is completely in charge, and RA is totally out of the loop:
P.S. bondman is urging people to email Tifford with other questions because Tifford has shown a willingness to respond (this is the second email response posted on the Yahoo! board). I kind of think the response rate will drop to zero once dozens of questions start coming his way.
Dear Mr. XXX,
Thank you for your e-mail inquiry to which this replies.
USXP has been placed into receivership by court order of the Hon. Gerald E. Lynch, US District Judge. The original order was dated August 31, 2007 and filed on September 4, 2007. The order was subsequently amended on September 9, 2007, effective August 31, 2007. The court-appointed Receiver is Jane W. Moscowitz, Esq., Moscowitz & Moscowitz, P.A., 1111 Brickell Avenue, Suite 2050, Miami Fl 33131; Telephone: 305-379-8300; e-mail: jmoscowitz@mmmpa.com.
I am awaiting instructions from the court appointed receiver regarding what action to take in the US Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit, the Federal Appellte Court in which the pending appeal currently is being pursued. At this moment I do not know, one way or the other, whether the Receiver wishes to continue prosecuting the appeal or abandon it. Those instructions should be received shortly, however.
Athur W. Tifford, Esq.
Tifford and Tifford, P.A.
Has to be - I'm pretty damn sure no regular 'investor' built up that kind of holding, no matter when they started buying.
Whoever it is, looks to be putting the fork in this pig today...
10M so far? with high percentage going off at .0011, including a 4618515 share trade?
I forgot... Who has the fork?
virginian: The following is a link to an article by Las Vegas ReviewJournal.com about the court case status back on June 25th. Near the end is a couple of paragraphs about the NJ court case. There is no concrete info about the names involved in the suit, but it doesn't look like MJ was:
http://www.lvrj.com/news/8162867.html
"Another twist in the case had come up by the time of that hearing: Gonzalez and the Jackson attorneys learned Universal might not even own the memorabilia.
As Universal negotiated the settlement with Jackson lawyers in May in Las Vegas, the company was involved in litigation in a New Jersey court, where several parties disputed the ownership of the items and sued Henry Vaccaro, who had sold the memorabilia to Universal.
On June 5, three days before he was ordered to turn the items over to Gonzalez, Guernsey's attorney received a letter from the Superior Court of New Jersey directing the auction house turn over all unsold items from the auction to Universal within seven days while that court continued to hear the case.
Jackson attorneys have described the New Jersey litigation as a legal scheme cooked up, with Universal's complicity, to abrogate the Las Vegas settlement agreement.
In the litigation, Vaccaro asserts he is the rightful owner of the memorabilia and had a contract to sell to Universal.
DeToffol, who did not return phone calls from the Review-Journal, assured the court that Universal was the rightful owner and was unwillingly brought into the New Jersey litigation as a defendant."
virginian: The NJ court case was not an appeal by MJ or any other jackson - there was some peripheral involvement but MJ was not a plaintif, as far as I can tell. It was supposedly an attempt by another party to claim ownership, I believe due to some previous deal with the guy who sold to RA that didn't go through for some reason.
The problem is that it is impossible to find out anything about NJ cases online. There is no search engine to look for info on their cases. If you want info, you have to go to the court in question to request it, probably with some fee involved.
I've tried many times to find it. Right now, the only info available is what RA says (do you really believe the NJ court found the Nevada judge in contempt, as RA claimed awhile back?), and based on RA's lack of familiarity with truth, that means we have nothing to go on.
But we do have the very specific record of the Nevada court. And we can very reasonably assume that the NJ court cannot declare any Nevada laws, and the court procedures based on those laws, as null and void.
And there is no indication of any court orders from NJ in the Nevada records.
virginian: No, it did not include the disputed items. They had already been awarded to MJ by the Nevada state court.
NJ cannot overturn a legal result in another state, and there is no evidence that NJ attempted to do that (since every judge in NJ knows they can't, there won't be any such evidence).
UXPS lost in Nevada because it was fighting to overturn an agreement that it had signed and sworn was valid in the Nevada court, an agreement that settled the case in order to allow the auction to go forward. That was a legal, binding agreement entered in the court record.
virginian: He won the right of ownership in Nevada, as well - ownership of the items not in dispute. That does show up in the Nevada court's record.
He lost his case in Nevada. Any right of ownership won in NJ, which I have yet to see any evidence of other than RA claim, would only have covered the items not covered by Nevada case.
No state court has any jurisdiction over a legally issued ruling in another state court.
Sorry, this was a duplicate of the last post.
An update on the MJ vs USXP suit in Nevada. For those who want to verify any of this info, do the following:
Go to:
http://courtgate.coca.co.clark.nv.us/DistrictCourt/asp/SearchPartyOptions.asp
Search for Jackson, Michael J.
Select the second case listed.
Select Case Activity.
The current status is Inactive.
On 8/23/2007, RA filed a notice of appeal (gee, does anyone think he's appealing because he won?).
On 8/31/2007, the court (judge) scheduled a hearing to occur on 9/27 to determine who is going to be paying court costs and opposition legal fees (USXP in both cases, since the judge has already ruled in MJ's favor - hence the notice of appeal by RA).
On 9/21/2007, a motion for a stay was filed by USXP, which also included a motion to withdraw as council, and that motion was scheduled to be handled in the same hearing as will address court costs and legal fees.
Most interesting, this 9/21 filing, because it cannot have been filed by RA, and had to be filed by the receiver. I believe she is asking for a stay so that she can review the case before she closes down the USXP end of it.
A lot will come out in the minutes that will eventually be published as part of the Calendar entry for the 9/27 hearing.
Stockdung: That suit was filed when Coach bought Subcontracting Concepts. RA claimed that he had first right of refusal on the purchase, which Subcontracting denied.
It's another one of RA's suits that is going nowhere, particularly since there won't be anything to collect, anyway.
Nice find, though. Very interesting...
There was a time when 45000 shares was actually worth something, not 67.50 - 9.99 (plus SEC fee).
The selling fees were virtually a 15% commission...
barryinla: My guess is you are right, and have been for some time.
Good luck to you, as well...
Last two trades, 311,500 and 500,000 at .0016.
Pretty ugly day (although I fully expect it to get uglier)...
Last trade at 3:56:21, 3 seconds short of two hours between trades.
Last trade was at 1:56:24, almost 2 hours ago.
Can't remember ever seeing this much of a timespan without trades with this stock.
And there's a pretty hefty block on the Ask, as well. 300K at .002, so far today.
The price has been getting driven down by some very large blocks selling at Bid over the last few weeks. Question is, who was holding these large blocks, for example 600K shares today?
I don't think there were many shareholders with anywhere near the block size holdings we've been seeing. I also don't think someone is selling 600K blocks short.
That leaves Barrons, trying to recoup whatever they can, or the company, trying to come up with funds to pay whatever bills they still need to pay (like their salaries - somehow I can't see these guys sitting around making nothing for whatever time is left before the doors close for good).
rolo731: Read the answer Bud Burrill provided in this response to a question from a USXP investor (you do know who Bud is, don't you and how close he has been in supporting RA?)
http://finance.groups.yahoo.com/group/usxp/message/17768
Bud...I understand you are more or less out of the loop from USXP at the persent time, but I wanted to revist some history with you, s'il vous plait...
Among companies that have claimed excessive naked shorting of their stock, I believe you have always spoken favorably of OSTK and USXP and not so favorably of CMKX, just t picking three. In the case of USXP, you have believed in Richard Altomare and his prolonged fight with the SEC relative to naked shorting, although you have always stated that you are not cognizant of the day-to-day running of the company and the hundreds of press releases put out by the CEO about funding, acquisitions, etc. Many of us, including myself, have high regard for you, your scholarship and your relentless fight for a just cause, thus my quandary of how you see things in the unfoldment of this particular stock and company.
As Richard himself said in one webcast, most folks either consider him to be "Sister Cabrini or Adolf Hitler". In other words, that is how much gap there is in people's surmisal of his character, depending on their own mental and psychological makeup or their exposure to him via their investment in the stock. I am not even including those gutless bashers here. Many of us are curious as to how you would explain the vast lack of transparency in all of Altomare's dealings over the past several years, especially w.r.t. his shareholders ? Who are the royal arabs and other not-so royal Dubai investors ? If they have purchased the entire float, why is this being kept such a secret ? Where are the filings of ownership if they own more than 5% of the outstanding stock ? Why did Richard mention in webcasts several times that the funds "are almost here" and never once did they reach their destination ? Why would the CEO
claim a collection of memorabilia of Michael Jackson and family
could fetch from 30 to 200 million when it later proved it was not even worth the money promised to the seller ? Why does the CEO repeatedly claim that the company has moved over 30 million bags to date without losing a single one when the reported revenues do not justify even 1% of that fantastic amount ? I could go on and on...
What I am getting at is perhaps there is a good answer to all of these apparent anomalies, but I would be damned if I can see it. Unfortunately, since you have always been a great supporter of Richard, some might question your motives in not challenging these rather blatant discrepencies, and therefore color oyur other yeoman like efforts over the past two decades, unless they can somehow resolve this conflict within themselves. I for one would love to hear what your explanation is on this subject. Thanks and best wishes..
Reply: This will come out in the wash of the appeal. The Receiver will have to be the one answering these questions now. She, as predicted, closed the doors, threw out the employees, changed the locks, and is now running an empty room.
As far as anyone coloring my efforts, I haven't been paid anything by USXP in nearly 2 years. I don't offer explanations or excuses to anyone. The Judge ignored the SEC's agreement to a jury trial on his own authority, saying a Jury couldn't understand the cases. Well, two juries and two judges already did.
I won't be commenting further, as I know nothing of the manner in which Ms. Moscowitz will see fit to discharge her duties. I expect her to lead the remains of the Company to de-registration and/or bankruptcy, either outcome meaning the shorts don't have to cover. The SEC will again protect the shorts.
I will be watching her actions, and I will reserve all my rights as a very significant unsecured creditor.
Which trucks?
beeboymama: So you are saying the USXP's trucks are much larger than U.S. Xpress trucks?
What logo did you see on those massive trucks?
Divine Madcat: It the 14th the deadline for the company's response that they didn't file? If so, then I believe that the entry is simply a notation in the court record that the company defaulted on this.
No PDF would be available in this case, because nothing was filed with the court to convert into a pdf.
beeboymama: The trucks you saw on the road belong to U.S. Xpress Enterprises.
Go to the following website, and select "Driving Opportunities" in the "Career Opportunities" drop-down menu and you'll see the trucks that you believe belong to USXP.
They don't.
http://www.usxpress.com/default.asp
virginian: Let's assume the best case scenario, that Luggage Express is close to being a money maker, or slightly positive, when you take away all the corporate overhang: Then the receiver would attempt to sell it to the highest bidder.
Personally, I don't see it happening, but, in theory, yes, she could try to sell off it, as well as any other subsidiary to anyone willing to buy it.
Her job is to try to get the 21M penalty owed by USXP out of USXP.
I see your are into understating things today (a little?)...
The IHub page, directly to the right of investorshub. Comes and goes - different ad or set of ads appear there each time you refresh the page.
Took a screen shot and saved the image as a jpg.
I don't know if it will still be there, but I do find it hilarious that there's "The Luggage Club" ad at the top of this page right now.
A competitor. Too funny...
www.theluggageclub.com
Checked after posting this. It's gone, for now.
rolo731: And what do you think it means that when you call the Boca office during normal business hours, you get the "our office is currently closed"?
rolo731: So, what is it you don't believe?
Do you believe the court put USXP into receivership?
Do you believe a receiver has been named?
Do you believe that receiver has taken control of USXP?
As I posted before, I have been considering buying 120,000 to round off my holdings to 500K.
At .0011, that would cost me 132.00 + 9.99 fee. I spend more than that on dinner now and then.
But, I'll probably lower that to .0005, for a cost of 60.00 + 9.99.
I just like round numbers, and 500K is more round than 380K.
Wow... My .0011 target is almost here.
I'll have to consider lowering it...
Rolo731: How's your reading comprehension? I cite the source of the news as "The SFB Journal is reporting the demise of USXP." And low and behold, the info I provide includes the source:
South Florida Business Journal - September 14, 2007
I didn't feel the need to spell out South Florida Business Journal in the first sentence because I had no idea that someone couldn't figure out the name of the source which is reporting the demise.
As for a link, here you go.
http://www.bizjournals.com/southflorida/stories/2007/09/17/tidbits1.html
P.S. I can accept rumor/lie innuendo from people who actually post useful info, now and then. Someone who never posts any useful piece of info at all, ever, has no right to make such an accusation. That part of your post was uncalled for and totally unnecessary. Simply asking for a link was sufficient.
underdog150: A bit odd - I posted the same info yesterday about 1 minute after you, and my post is still there.
Don't remember exactly what you said in your post, but can't say it was much different than what I said in mine.
The SFB Journal is reporting the demise of USXP. Unfortunately, the rest of the article is for paid subscribers only.
From a mybiz11 post on RB:
Receiver sends Universal Express employees home
South Florida Business Journal - September 14, 2007
by Staff reports
After more than three years of legal battles with the SEC, Boca Raton-based Universal Express has ceased operations.
Receiver Jane Moscowitz, who was appointed by the New York federal judge in the civil case brought by the SEC, arrived on Sept. 7 and dismissed most of the 20 employees after a few hours, according to an account from a former Universal Express employee who did not want to be named.
Been there, done that.
P.S. Might round up my holding to 500K shares by buying 120000 at .0011.
I know, there's lots of other things to do with the 132.00 that would cost me (plus 9.99)...
Try telling that to a Hindu (or is it Budhists that believe in reincarnation?)...
P.S. Another person selling large volume of shares (compared to what we were used to).
What is most sad is how little money 681000 shares actually raises for the seller these days.
Anyone else listen to the MoneyTV piece this AM? I was actually shocked to see he did one, but more shocked to hear a somewhat subdued RA speak the truth.
A receiver has been assigned.
He's complying with all the court's requests (OK, maybe one lie).
Meeting with the receiver tomorow (matches info provided earlier in the repost of info provided by a former employee).
His continued role as CEO is up to the receiver, as is the continued employment of anyone at USXP.
Waiting to see what his attorneys can do about the situation.