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.
Sorry for being dense, but it's not at all obvious to me why it would be inappropriate. I would think that posting the address would settle quite strongly the question of whether Sulja is expanding into Calgary.
Do you have an address for that place, Frenchy?
Thanks!
One way or another I feel the company as a hole
Oh, now that one is just too easy, given SLJB's history...
Good point(s), Marketmann!
In light of all the positives that are just days away,
What, specifically, positives are you talking about? How many, specifcially, days away are they?
Now this sounds like someone on a mission!
Does anyone live close enough to recon Erie Street
Good luck to you!
Haha, too many spy novels, I guess.
A sharp dresser like Black Pete might be real popular there... not in a way he'd enjoy though. (Maybe he would enjoy it, on second thought...)
This is another transposition of the Sulja addresses. The incorporation documents/business licenses list 1710 Erie and 1170 Erie for Sulja Building Supplies. Does anyone live close enough to recon Erie Street and see what's at each of the three addresses?
Thanks
Someone's asleep at the switch! No last second trade of 100 shares at $0.015 to keep up the closing price.
HOW ABOUT YOU? WILL YOU ANSWER SIMPLY YES OR NO FOR ALL?
ANSWER THIS: DO YOU HAVE ANY FACTS TO SUPPORT YOUR THEORY THAT THIS COMPANY IS A PROVEN FRAUD?
YES OR NO:
PLEASE FILL IN THE BLANK:___________________
FOR THE RECORD, DISINTERESTED ONE
Got guts? Then answer!
Yes, the facts ennumerated in the affidavit that Tom Anderson filed.
As I stated before, you never answer questions or address issues on this board. All you do is try to change the subject.
I believe it's because you know deep down that SLJB has scammed you out of money, but pride prevents you from admitting it.
What say you?
Simple yes or no question: Is your average cost basis for SLJB greater than the closing price today?
Also, TFS was using a hypothetical example to illustrate the situation regarding SLJB. You, ZigZagZen, simply failed to understand.
Thanks for the link. Does anyone have a similar link for Canadian courts? I tried to find one but had no luck.
Thanks!
Dis please calm down, your guessing and interpreting that I'm not green already...LOL
Simple yes or no question: Is your average cost basis for SLJB greater than the closing price yesterday?
You keep trying to deflect attention from the fact that SLJB issued a PR the strongly implied they had won a victory in court. You simply can't refute that, since we all can view it online easily. You also can't offer any evidence that supports their claim of victory.
You won't address issues regarding SLJB that are clearly stated because you know you cannot spin them away. Instead you try to divert peoples' attention to non sequiturs and hope some poor sap invests in this scam so you can get out with a smaller loss.
I don't know anyone who thinks Nifong's interpretations were reasonable. There was testimony at his disbarrment hearing that he himself knew the case was a sham.
I possess the intelligence and enough familiarity with the English language that my interpretation of statements will likely be in line the the majority of the population.
Flame and spin all you want, Ziggy, the fact remains that the "seek and destroy" PR implied strongly that SLJB had already been victorious in a court of law. They have not.
The "seek and destroy" PR stated:
"A spokesperson for the company said today the SLJB has had its first success in dealing with one of these scandalous persons and are now in the position of collecting damages tied to the outcome of the legal proceedings which followed the identification of the guilty party through the discovery of their IP (internet protocol) address that they utilized to post their unsupported and slanderous attacks on both business and personal issues involving the company."
SLJB and PV are different entities. If the lawsuit involved PV and SLJB was not named in it, then the press release should have said as much... but then again, there would be no reason for a press release in that case, would there? If SLJB were actually a party to persuit of internet bashers then the status of the case should be clearly laid out in the PR. They imply that a case has already been settled and they are "in the position of collecting damages". No one has found any court records to indicate that SLJB won or even filed such a case.
A reasonable interpretation of the PR is that a case has been settled in SLJB's favor. That was not reality, however. I have not rushed to judgment as did Mike Nifong, nor am I in a position of power to enforce such judgment to the detriment of others. I am voicing my opinion on an internet stock message board.
Finally, what you imply at the end of your post is completely wrong. I am not trying to bash this stock down to pick up shares of SLJB cheaply. I am trying to warn the uninitiated that this company is a scam.
Thank you for translating my long winded reply, Janice.
So by your logic, I could find some bottom feeding attorney (a redundancy, I know) and claim legal victory against you, publicly, because I was going to file a lawsuit against you?
If I were to do such a thing, especially claiming publicly that I had achieved legal victory, would you not think it misleading?
Are you saying SLJB's "victory" is in finding a lawyer who will file suits against internet posters?
Original facts I have posted? Not many. I have reiterated many facts in hopes of increasing the signal to noise ratio on this board.
I have contributed to following:
On 13 April I called Leslie to verify that the "seek and destroy" PR was authentic. You remember that one, right Ed? It was the one where SLJB stated unequivocally that they have had success is suing internet message board posters and were in the process of recovering money. I have not seen any facts to back up this claim. Moreover they have not, as promised, delivered another revenue stream via litigation. If you have verfiable facts to support SLJB's claim of legal success, please share them with all of us. And don't tell me to do my own DD. I tried to find any evidence that supports their claim. I could not. If there is some (verifiable court documents, etc.), please let us know.
I signed up for the US District court online document system and verified the wording of documents posted regarding the Drago case. When others here, like Jake8812, were lying repeatedly about SLJB's lawyers not quitting and the case being dismissed I verified that (A) SLJB's had quit due to SLJB personnel not communicating with them and (B) that the lawsuit was proceeding and had not been dismissed.
Other than that, I have tried to tie together facts and present them such that people who might be considering investing in SLJB would see the whole picture, not just the part painted with shades of rose.
but they don't want you to make the choice of SLJB as an investment and that bothers me that someone wants to influence my free will to choose and better myself and/or learn from my mistakes.
Are you saying choosing SLJB as an investment is primarily a "learn through making a mistake" exercise?
I think some of us here with negative opinions of the stock are simply trying to present potential investors with facts that will never be addressed by the pumping longs.
JMO
What do you mean by "Call the TA"?
Thanks
Who else besides Petar and Steve could be absolutely sure that Sulja would not follow-thru on any of its promises?
Leslie, maybe. Not saying it's so, but just trying to explore all the possibilities...
Ed, can you give an example of this please? I have a feeling that the 40%-60% drops followed by a bounce did not come at the end of a long chain of promises to release AFs, including claims of having AFs in hand. Also, and I am guessing here, I bet the companies to which you refer did not release PRs claiming to have inked a dizzying amount of business.
As others have stated, SLJB's failure to release the AFs was the last straw... they had puffed themselves up so much in the previous 6-12 months and not delivered on anything. People finally had enough, faced the facts, and dumped. I don't think any bear/short conspiracy was involved here.
Just my $0.02.
I still stand by my original statement. Anyone who has intelligence greater than God gave a gopher, maturity beyond a 12 year old and who has reviewed the history of SLJB for the past 12 or 14 months would know exactly of what I was writing. They would also recognize "everything we said is a lie" as an epithet, not a quote of SLJB.
http://biz.yahoo.com/iw/070110/0201781.html
In this press release they said not to rely on any prior press release. You can play your silly word games, but I stand by my original statement.
Evidently six sigma doesn't care. SLJB's retraction announcement should have clued them in.
Listed on EWPA.com:
http://www.ewpa.com/TWPmanufacturersList.php
Included as source of significant construction market activity by marketresearch.com:
http://www.marketresearch.com/product/print/default.asp?g=1&productid=1467412
Subject of Sigma Six article:
http://www.sixsig.info/six-sigma/date/2006/08/
I don't have info on the subsidy program, so I cannot comment on it.
Let's take the others:
The six sigma article was released during the "everything we said is a lie" period. 'Nuff said.
The ewpa is simply a trade association. You sell the right products, pay the association some money and you too can be a member. It doesn't mean a darn thing about size of business, future prospects or whether or not you are a slimy scam of a company that is robbing its shareholders via a pump and dump (which is what Sulja is and is doing).
The market research report is only a market analysis of some companies in the roofing business. The preamble/abstract of the report says it analyzes several key players but does not say all the companies covered are key players. Moreover, the reference to SLJB in the TOC appears only to analyze their merger with LoftWerks.
Next...
Fine. Keep on deflecting and not face the real issue. I know you realized what I was asking in the first post, but chose to bring up semantics.
You don't answer the question I ask because you know there are no stocks that fit all the criteria I listed that are not scams/engaging in illegal activity.
So now were comparing all pink stocks?
Perhaps I was not clear in my post. My apologies. I did not mean that we should compare stocks with any of the conditions I mentioned, but rather ALL of them.
Now what say you?
Point taken. However, when a company has followed a pattern that has been a template for fraud when followed by other companies then it's certainly reasonable to draw attention to the similarities, as Guy has done.
Now, can you name some companies that have
* Promised audited financials then failed to deliver
* Claimed huge deals which failed to materialize
* Issued a PR saying all prior PRs should not be considered true
* Traded on the pink sheets
* Been incorporated in Nevada
that have not been guilty of fraud or other illegal activites?
Thanks
This drivel has been circulating since the dot com bust, perhaps longer. The first tip off that it's a hoax is the name of the Company: Global Calumny Funds. Look up the word calumny. Tell me you honestly believe a company would take that name.
No, this is a joke perpetrated against all the kool aide drinkers over the years who refuse to face the fact that they made a bad choice.
Hear hear!
Tape painting:
Let's have a poll. Who here finds the instances of very small trades (typically less than $40 trade value) within the last 30 minutes (and usually withing the last 5 minutes) of trading to be suspicious? I am referring to the last few weeks of trading when the stock tumbled from the lofty heights of ~$0.02.
Who here thinks it's coincidental?
Other opinion?
Thanks
Or did you forget, I can repost it for you!!
Do it! Do it!!
(please)
I hope you are correct and the audit is on the up and up. I agree that TS would be foolish to continue to engage in book cooking.
I can envision, however, one last pump via AFs so that Petar and Andy can do one last dump to get enough money to live for a while in Dubai, Brazil, Timbuktu or where ever they flee to escape justice.
Just my opinion.
That being said, what you and the rest of the Sulja Sheeple are failing to take into account is the FACT that Sulja put out press releases about revenues that the audit will show to have been, at best, wildly inaccurate and misleading and, more than likely fraudulent:
Unfortunately, this may not be the case. The AFs may show that SLJB met their revenue claims. The explanation: The audit itself will be a fraud. Why oh why would a company under a cloud of suspicion regarding the veracity of its claims in PRs hire an auditor that (A) has a very bad reputation in terms of integrity and (B) is over 1000 miles away?
The answer that seems most likely to me is that Turner Stone are probably buddies with Andrew Devries and have been, in the past, a party to his other frauds.
Just my opinion.
If SLJB release audited financials that paint a very rosey (but inaccurate) picture, they may buy some more time to dump shares, but sooner or later they will be caught out.
Thanks, Zig. Higher VWAP indicates against tape painting (for today).
Yep, someone painted the SLJB tape again.
Maybe, maybe not. Last week was pretty blatant tape painting, IMO. However, there was a lot of activity today up and down. The last trades did bear the hallmarks of painting, though: volume so low it doesn't even rate one pixel on yahoo's chart for the day.
Seems like he is not the only one to head for the hills. It sure is quiet today.
Yeah... a little TOO quiet.
Ok, ok, I'm sorry. I just couldn't let that opportunity pass. ;)