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.
It probably wouldn't get headlines.
It'd probably get a lawyer sanctioned... or disbarred.
If I've figured out a way to make a large sum of money in a short period of time based upon the market's misperceptions of a company's value, why shouldn't I do it?
Lehman didn't go broke because they were shorting securities.
Lehman went broke because they had a hyper-leveraged balance sheet full of toxic assets. (And the junk they held off-balance-sheet was even worse.)
Pastor DuhWayne Reeves deserves a spot on one of those lists... or a list of his own.
The shares are worthless.
That's the problem you'd have in any court. In any lawsuit that might be brought against me, or the brokers, or anyone who might have naked shorted CMKM Diamonds, the plaintiffs would have to demonstrate damages. And because CMKM Diamonds shares are understood to be worthless by most reasonable people, your damages would be nil; your lawsuit wouldn't have a chance.
As I recall, weren't you one of the morons who went through the trouble of getting your certificates? If you've got a certificate for the shares you bought, then you don't have an actionable claim at all. So how would the existence of any ex-clearing positions be of benefit to you?
Great. So you have one party who has never delivered a security that is worthless to another party.
What is it that you think is going to happen? And how will this benefit you?
Let's suppose, for just a moment, that you were a contra-party to a trade with me for a billion shares of CMKM Diamonds. And that I've failed to deliver that billion shares.
What kind of a suit would you envision bringing against me?
What makes you think that the existence of any transactions done ex-clearing will have any impact on the scam that just occurred here? Even if there were naked short positions created as a consequence of those ex-clearing trades?
Anyone who might have naked shorted CMKM Diamonds made the right trade. They've earned their profits.
Obviously my time would be better spent pursuing other endeavors, of which I have many. But the amusement factor that you morons provide me is a little too much to forego at times.
The whole thing is a joke. Why do you think I come here?
I'm not saying you should waste more of your money with a reward offer. But you did ask about the legality of such an offer.
What IS legal would be your offering a reward for information that leads to his arrest.
Of course he would. "okie" is a grifter.
Grifters don't take well to people calling out their scams.
The guy's name was Markopolos, you moron.
And the dopes who bought CMKM Diamonds are definitely not in the same league as Harry Markopolos.
It's not an issue of fear, jimmy. I just know how pump and dump scams always end.
On some issues, Gary and I see eye-to-eye, namely how managements and promoters use the "naked short selling" scam to rip off gullible, naive investors.
On other topics, specifically hedge fund-related topics, Weiss and I are in sharp disagreement.
"Luckily for me and a handfull of others, we didn't get burned. We bought, certed, and have held."
Classic. And you wonder why no one at the SEC will listen to you.
It has nothing to do with SEC staff feeling they're "in charge". What you will find is that many of them get impatient with dim-wits.
I'm not so sure it's in the investing public's best interests to have SEC staff wasting much of their time on the phone with dim-wits. Their limited resources could be put to better use.
Yeah, but don't tell you-know-who that the point of Fizzle's bogus "Phase I" task force scheme was to impede the SEC's efforts to revoke CMKM Diamonds.
First of all, there is a process to revocation. And even a scam outfit like CMKM Diamonds is entitled to due process of the law. If you want to change the process of revocation, that would certainly be something to take up with the SEC and/or Congress. However, there is a reason that the current process involves an initial suspension, followed by a hearing, and then a final revocation. Do you really want the SEC to have the power to arbitrarily revoke the registration of any company they see fit to revoke at any time?
Why should there have been any actions taken against broker/dealers accepting unsolicited orders from customers who want to dump their hard-earned money into a scam?
"Delidog", like Casavant, et al, is also entitled to due process of the law. He didn't become a criminal until he committed the act of selling unregistered securities. You certainly can't have expected the SEC to have known of "Delidog"'s intent prior to the act.
The only repercussions the SEC faces now over the CMKM Diamonds hype comes from a handful of whack-job malcontents who still don't understand how and why they got ripped off. They're pretty used to the crazies by now.
When the SEC revoked CMKM Diamonds, there was no point in entertaining the complaints of the bagholders who bought into this scam. From a financial perspective, they were already dead. The purpose behind the revocation was to prevent CMKM Diamonds' management and promoters from adding to their victim list.
The shareholders of CMKM Diamonds weren't ignored because they were considered "non-essential" investors. They were ignored because they were already victims. Nothing could be done to save them without creating an even larger group of new victim shareholders.
I'm not the least bit surprised to hear granny's the M.C. of her very own Dope Show.
Oh, well, if they said so, then it MUST be true...
What makes you think they ever intended to start a new company?
I'm not the one who fell for this pump and dump scam.
It's astonishing that you morons will continue to read the junk he writes.
The SEC does not concern itself with incompetent lawyers that shake down suckers for $25 a pop for shoddy, ineffective representation. Neither does the DOJ.
I think Fizzle is clueless and a little shady. What does that have to do with General Motors?
None of that largesse is going to find its way into the pockets of old GM shareholders.
There were no payouts for the investors who bought old GM.
After the bankruptcy process has run its course, the old GM (symbol: MTLQQ) will get wiped out.
Great. So you and 49,999 other morons got your certificate.
Besides dropping six-figures in Fizzle's pocket, what'd it get you for your efforts?
Let's put that 50,000 number in context.
There are over 50 million U.S. households that invest in the stock market.
You and your idiot friends, all 50,000 of them, are in the bottom 0.1% when it comes to investor aptitude.
No soup for you.
The U.S. taxpayer certainly shouldn't be on the hook to the idiots who bought CMKM Diamonds.
It wasn't just Jag Media. (I think Darren put him up to that pump and dump.)
He totally screwed up with Global Links. And I can't help but wonder how many people got burned by that scam as a result of his misleading story.
He also embraced Altomare of Universal Express fame and Rod Young from Eagletech. He's got a long track record of being on the wrong end of an extensive list of pump and dumps.
In the strictest sense of SIPC coverage, Madoff's victims should not be getting any payouts from SIPC, as SIPC coverage is only intended to cover losses that arise from the failure of a registered broker/dealer. It's raised the ire of a number of broker/dealers who will end up paying higher SIPC premiums as a result of the Madoff heist.
Madoff victims might get a portion of their losses back from SIPC because Bernard L. Madoff Investment Securities LLC was a registered investment advisory firm. Prior to 2006, Madoff was using his broker/dealer, Bernard L. Madoff Investment Securities LLC of New York (a separate legal entity) and its “solely incidental exemption” from the Investment Advisers Act, to do business.
After he registered the investment advisory firm, he continued to use his broker/dealer as a qualified custodian, which put it within the oversight of FINRA. Since this places jurisdiction in FINRA's hands for the oversight of Madoff's money management business, a case can be made for compelling SIPC to cover Madoff victim losses.
Unfortunately, SIPC has no mandate whatsoever to payout anything to suckers who fall for pump and dump scams.
I never said that I've never lost on a stock pick, h2. If it gives you any comfort, the cumulative losses on stocks where I've been wrong over the years runs in the hundreds of thousands of dollars.
But there is a huge difference between losing on a stock pick where you've actually done some real due diligence and getting suckered into a pump and dump scam like CMKM Diamonds where you've done no due diligence at all.
And you compound your mistake by blaming other people for your bone-headed investment decisions. That's why I belittle people like you.
I have no financial interest in the outcome of CMKM Diamonds, but I am keenly interested in how failed investors justify their decision-making. Ultimately, it does play a role in how I approach the markets.
My task, as an asset manager, is to generate "alpha". My "alpha" comes from people like you and everyone else who gets suckered into stocks like CMKM Diamonds.
The lying is never going to stop. Outfits like Fizzle's thrive on it.
I understand the documents perfectly, Pedro. You're certainly not confusing my contempt for Fizzle as being pro-Urban Casavant, are you?
I've known since I first encountered CMKM Diamonds that Casavant was crooked. And I'm not saying that Fizzle's shadiness is on the same plane as Casavant's criminal behavior. But just because Fizzle's not as bad as Casavant, doesn't mean Fizzle's not a sleaze-ball.
It would seem that you care, Pedro. You have taken issue with my statement that Fizzle interfered with the SEC's attempts to revoke CMKM Diamonds.
It doesn't really matter that Fizzle was a complete failure in his attempts. He DID interfere and he actively attempted to thwart the SEC's attempts to revoke the stock.
Not only that, but he managed to shake down a bunch of idiots for $25 apiece for the pleasure. That's what REALLY makes his work despicable.