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.
I got it on my level 2 news bulletins, but I'm suppose to be able to just click on it & it brings up another page that has the filings but it dosen't work anymore. damnit... pizz me off, lol.
10QSB was out at 5:28 but I can't bring it up, its not posted on pinksheets or yahoo finance. still looking on other sites though, damn.
ticopower, exactly everything is rigged for the rich dosen't matter what it is, & because they are rich they can bribe, buy, steal their way out of it, makes you wonder what the future will be like for our kids & grandchildren...
nealgalt1, this was an ongoing discussion with mimurry, I am not accusing them, it is in their financials,
https://www.otcstockinfo.com/repository/623490/623490_FR9.pdf
Link will not come up for some reason, but this is the link for the financials they last submitted to shareholders.
the problem I have is that they make it seem as if they are doing us a favor while they still had the dilution going on @ the time, now I know that the dilution has stopped (hopefully) & I believe that it has. I am just very cautious & questionable when a company does this.
mimurry, sorry it took so long to respond as I had to research the data. Glad your not going to have a heartattack really...
Arena I'm trading in?? what do you want to fight me now??
To insinuate that unaudited financials create (parinoid behavior) Exhibiting or characterized by extreme and irrational fear, My post don't pose that meaning. disbelief disgruntled or perhaps distrust but not extreme irrational fear.
I don't care what you call it, I call it a smoke screen when a company tries to say they are going to buy back shares but yet still dilute.ha, IMO he should have waited to post the buy back. It just would have looked better.
You wanted me to post another campany that postponed & or cancelled CD's well here is one. (INSQ) http://www.findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m0EIN/is_2005_Sept_26/ai_n15630495
I concur, mimurry the company dosen't have to give us any financials, for that I applaud them in there efforts.
Oh & yes I still hold my core position.
good day to you to sir!!!!
charts look good here,could see another run this week I doubt it go past .0055 but with good news good run,GLTY.
robotrader not only maxed out but they can't dilute anymore as the A/S is @ 800,000,000 so just that alone would intice traders to buy some cause if news comes out "BOOM chack a lacka lacka"....lol.
by Mark Faulk
Commentary - Aug 18, 2006
From now on, don't believe a word of anything the SEC tells you.
Chances are, they're lying. In a courtroom, they call it "impeaching
the witness," Attorneys refers to it as the "Once a liar, always a
liar" scenario.
Over a year and a half after the story of a little company called
Global Links Corp. was first reported by the late Gayle Essary at
FinancialWire.net, Dave Patch of investigatethesec.com has exposed
major fraud on Wall Street, and a blatant cover-up by the SEC. In
that story, which was cited by Senator Bob Bennett in a Senate
Banking Committee hearing in March of 2005, where he questioned then
SEC Chairman William Bennett about naked short selling, 50 million
shares were traded in the first two days after a single shareholder,
Robert Simpson, bought every single share. In fact, another
shareholder, Paul Flotos, bought 15% of Global Links stockafter
Simpson bought 100% of the company, and both shareholders registered
their purchases with the SEC, claiming 115% combined ownership in a
company that was still trading tens of millions of shares on a daily
basis.
Now, Dave Patch has received, through the Freedom of Information Act,
SEC records confirming that over ten million counterfeit shares of
Global Links stock were dumped into the market immediately after the
company did a reverse split and reduced the total share count to just
over one million real shares. The brokers sold millions upon millions
of fake shares, and the SEC covered it up. In fact, almost six
million shares still remained undelivered as of the end of 2005. In
classic cover-up mode, by calling the counterfeit shares "long fails"
instead of "short fails," the recent list only shows 6,800 shares
short for Global Links. So…only 6,800 counterfeit "short fails," but
millions of "long fails." It's pure distortion of the facts, it's
disinformation, sleight of hand. A fail is a fail is a fail.
I repeat: Don't believe a word of anything the SEC tells you.
There are several ways that an attorney can discredit an individual
in a court of law. According to Wikipedia:
Bias-- The individual is biased against one party or in favor of the
other.
Inconsistent Statement-- The witness has made two or more conflicting
statements. By exposing his conflicting statements, you reduce his
credibility.
Character-- Show that the witness has a community-recognized
reputation for dishonesty.
Prior Criminal Acts-- If the witness has committed any crime
involving dishonesty (i.e. larceny-by-trick, embezzlement, fraud,
etc.) then the prior conviction is admissible under every
circumstance. The judge cannot refuse this evidence because it is so
probative of dishonesty.
Bias? Conflicting statements? A reputation for dishonesty? Prior
criminal acts?
Try "all of the above."
The SEC has been caught covering up fraud, plain and simple. And if
they've done it once, chances are they've done it a thousand times.
Once a liar, always a liar. If there's any justice left in America
whatsoever, Congress will launch an immediate investigation into this
scandal, and the media coverage will trigger a public outcry that
will topple the hierarchy from Wall Street to Washington.
But what about the major media? Will they jump all over this story
and expose the SEC and the Wall Street elite who are robbing
shareholders blind? Will NBC, CNBC, CBS, AOL/Time Warner, or FOX
protect America against the corruption on Wall Street, or are they
somehow also "biased against one party or in favor of the other?" For
starters, the New York Stock Exchange sits on the board of directors
of every one of those news organizations, and all of the top
brokerage firms and investment banks fill out the majority of the
remaining seats.
In short, every single major news organization in America is
controlled by Wall Street.
The only mainstream writer to discuss the Global Links story was
Carol Remond, and in a July 26, 2005 article called Global Links
Corp: The Real Story the Faulking Truth discredited her as a liar who
printed quotes that company never made, and who dismissed the 60
million shares traded in two days (when NO shares should have been
available for sell at any price) as brokerage firms legally shorting
the stock to "instill liquidity in the market."
How do you use the excuse of instilling liquidity in the market for a
stock that DOESN'T HAVE A SINGLE SHARE FOR SALE?
This is the SEC's own response to "Does NSCC's stock borrow program
create counterfeit shares?":
"NSCC's stock borrow program, as approved by the Commission, permits
NSCC to borrow securities from its participants for the purpose of
completing settlements only if participants have made those
securities available to NSCC for this purpose and those securities
are on deposit in the participant's account at DTC."
Over a year ago, we put it this way: "Where did those brokers expect
to find the shares to cover those trades, since they DIDN'T EXIST?
Answer: they didn't expect to cover those trades, just as they
haven't covered trades in thousands of other companies' stock for
years. They expect the SEC and DTC to just let them get away with
criminal counterfeiting, because THAT'S HOW IT'S ALWAYS BEEN."
And now, Dave Patch has the evidence in his hands that makes that
statement look prophetic. THEY STILL HADN'T DELIVERED THE MAJORITY OF
THOSE SHARES A YEAR AND A HALF LATER, AND THE SEC KNEW IT, AND
COVERED IT UP. In the words of Bud Burrell, "the Dave Patch article
makes this `game over.' This kind of brutal arrogance is nothing more
or less than simple treason."
In Bob O'Brien's article Dave Patch Exposes SEC Colluding With Wall
Street To Defraud Investors, O'Brien facetiously says "I suppose that
it is possible that the SEC ignored Bennett's instruction to
Donaldson to look into Global Links and figure out what was going
on," and follows it with the comment "It isn't remotely likely."
The SEC knew, they were fully aware of the Global Links situation,
and they covered it up. In fact, while they allowed brokers to sell
millions upon millions of counterfeit shares, they were busy
investigating Global Links - trying to discredit the company itself.
In our June 26, 2005 article, company representative Pat Donahoo said,
"At present, the Company is cooperating with SEC requests for
information. All of their requests, thus far, seem to be directed at
potential company wrongdoing, and nothing has been mentioned of any
victimization of the company or its shareholders. It feels like they
would rather find any way to blame everything on somebody else,
rather than accept responsibility for something that should never
have happened. It's a pretty scary feeling for a country where
freedom is supposed to be a reality!"
Why did the SEC go after the company instead of following up on
Senator Bennett's request to investigate evidence of naked short
selling in the Global Links case?
Why didn't they investigate Etrade, who was singled out by Wells
Fargo Bank as the main culprit in the failure to deliver shares to
investors trying to get their certificates?
Why didn't they go after the DTC, who allowed millions of shares to
be traded when NOT ONE share was available in the NCSS stock borrow
pool?
Why didn't they investigate Carol Remond, who lied about Global Links
in her articles, and clearly slanted her coverage to cover up the
fraud committed by Wall Street?
Why did they fail to even respond to numerous investor inquiries
about failures to deliver stock in certificate form? One shareholder
was told by his broker that his certificates "somehow got `stuck' in
the system," and another was informed that "the stock had a chill on
it."
This reeks of a massive cover-up, one that extends all the way from
Wall Street to the SEC, and one that implicates those in Congress who
have allowed it to continue unchecked. Wall Street robbed America,
the SEC covered the tracks, and the media concocted the alibis. And
Congress turned a blind eye to the entire robbery.
One more time, for good measure: If it's happened once, then it's
happened a thousand times.
Once a liar, always a liar, and that's the Faulking Truth
by Mark Faulk
Commentary - Aug 18, 2006
From now on, don't believe a word of anything the SEC tells you.
Chances are, they're lying. In a courtroom, they call it "impeaching
the witness," Attorneys refers to it as the "Once a liar, always a
liar" scenario.
Over a year and a half after the story of a little company called
Global Links Corp. was first reported by the late Gayle Essary at
FinancialWire.net, Dave Patch of investigatethesec.com has exposed
major fraud on Wall Street, and a blatant cover-up by the SEC. In
that story, which was cited by Senator Bob Bennett in a Senate
Banking Committee hearing in March of 2005, where he questioned then
SEC Chairman William Bennett about naked short selling, 50 million
shares were traded in the first two days after a single shareholder,
Robert Simpson, bought every single share. In fact, another
shareholder, Paul Flotos, bought 15% of Global Links stockafter
Simpson bought 100% of the company, and both shareholders registered
their purchases with the SEC, claiming 115% combined ownership in a
company that was still trading tens of millions of shares on a daily
basis.
Now, Dave Patch has received, through the Freedom of Information Act,
SEC records confirming that over ten million counterfeit shares of
Global Links stock were dumped into the market immediately after the
company did a reverse split and reduced the total share count to just
over one million real shares. The brokers sold millions upon millions
of fake shares, and the SEC covered it up. In fact, almost six
million shares still remained undelivered as of the end of 2005. In
classic cover-up mode, by calling the counterfeit shares "long fails"
instead of "short fails," the recent list only shows 6,800 shares
short for Global Links. So…only 6,800 counterfeit "short fails," but
millions of "long fails." It's pure distortion of the facts, it's
disinformation, sleight of hand. A fail is a fail is a fail.
I repeat: Don't believe a word of anything the SEC tells you.
There are several ways that an attorney can discredit an individual
in a court of law. According to Wikipedia:
Bias-- The individual is biased against one party or in favor of the
other.
Inconsistent Statement-- The witness has made two or more conflicting
statements. By exposing his conflicting statements, you reduce his
credibility.
Character-- Show that the witness has a community-recognized
reputation for dishonesty.
Prior Criminal Acts-- If the witness has committed any crime
involving dishonesty (i.e. larceny-by-trick, embezzlement, fraud,
etc.) then the prior conviction is admissible under every
circumstance. The judge cannot refuse this evidence because it is so
probative of dishonesty.
Bias? Conflicting statements? A reputation for dishonesty? Prior
criminal acts?
Try "all of the above."
The SEC has been caught covering up fraud, plain and simple. And if
they've done it once, chances are they've done it a thousand times.
Once a liar, always a liar. If there's any justice left in America
whatsoever, Congress will launch an immediate investigation into this
scandal, and the media coverage will trigger a public outcry that
will topple the hierarchy from Wall Street to Washington.
But what about the major media? Will they jump all over this story
and expose the SEC and the Wall Street elite who are robbing
shareholders blind? Will NBC, CNBC, CBS, AOL/Time Warner, or FOX
protect America against the corruption on Wall Street, or are they
somehow also "biased against one party or in favor of the other?" For
starters, the New York Stock Exchange sits on the board of directors
of every one of those news organizations, and all of the top
brokerage firms and investment banks fill out the majority of the
remaining seats.
In short, every single major news organization in America is
controlled by Wall Street.
The only mainstream writer to discuss the Global Links story was
Carol Remond, and in a July 26, 2005 article called Global Links
Corp: The Real Story the Faulking Truth discredited her as a liar who
printed quotes that company never made, and who dismissed the 60
million shares traded in two days (when NO shares should have been
available for sell at any price) as brokerage firms legally shorting
the stock to "instill liquidity in the market."
How do you use the excuse of instilling liquidity in the market for a
stock that DOESN'T HAVE A SINGLE SHARE FOR SALE?
This is the SEC's own response to "Does NSCC's stock borrow program
create counterfeit shares?":
"NSCC's stock borrow program, as approved by the Commission, permits
NSCC to borrow securities from its participants for the purpose of
completing settlements only if participants have made those
securities available to NSCC for this purpose and those securities
are on deposit in the participant's account at DTC."
Over a year ago, we put it this way: "Where did those brokers expect
to find the shares to cover those trades, since they DIDN'T EXIST?
Answer: they didn't expect to cover those trades, just as they
haven't covered trades in thousands of other companies' stock for
years. They expect the SEC and DTC to just let them get away with
criminal counterfeiting, because THAT'S HOW IT'S ALWAYS BEEN."
And now, Dave Patch has the evidence in his hands that makes that
statement look prophetic. THEY STILL HADN'T DELIVERED THE MAJORITY OF
THOSE SHARES A YEAR AND A HALF LATER, AND THE SEC KNEW IT, AND
COVERED IT UP. In the words of Bud Burrell, "the Dave Patch article
makes this `game over.' This kind of brutal arrogance is nothing more
or less than simple treason."
In Bob O'Brien's article Dave Patch Exposes SEC Colluding With Wall
Street To Defraud Investors, O'Brien facetiously says "I suppose that
it is possible that the SEC ignored Bennett's instruction to
Donaldson to look into Global Links and figure out what was going
on," and follows it with the comment "It isn't remotely likely."
The SEC knew, they were fully aware of the Global Links situation,
and they covered it up. In fact, while they allowed brokers to sell
millions upon millions of counterfeit shares, they were busy
investigating Global Links - trying to discredit the company itself.
In our June 26, 2005 article, company representative Pat Donahoo said,
"At present, the Company is cooperating with SEC requests for
information. All of their requests, thus far, seem to be directed at
potential company wrongdoing, and nothing has been mentioned of any
victimization of the company or its shareholders. It feels like they
would rather find any way to blame everything on somebody else,
rather than accept responsibility for something that should never
have happened. It's a pretty scary feeling for a country where
freedom is supposed to be a reality!"
Why did the SEC go after the company instead of following up on
Senator Bennett's request to investigate evidence of naked short
selling in the Global Links case?
Why didn't they investigate Etrade, who was singled out by Wells
Fargo Bank as the main culprit in the failure to deliver shares to
investors trying to get their certificates?
Why didn't they go after the DTC, who allowed millions of shares to
be traded when NOT ONE share was available in the NCSS stock borrow
pool?
Why didn't they investigate Carol Remond, who lied about Global Links
in her articles, and clearly slanted her coverage to cover up the
fraud committed by Wall Street?
Why did they fail to even respond to numerous investor inquiries
about failures to deliver stock in certificate form? One shareholder
was told by his broker that his certificates "somehow got `stuck' in
the system," and another was informed that "the stock had a chill on
it."
This reeks of a massive cover-up, one that extends all the way from
Wall Street to the SEC, and one that implicates those in Congress who
have allowed it to continue unchecked. Wall Street robbed America,
the SEC covered the tracks, and the media concocted the alibis. And
Congress turned a blind eye to the entire robbery.
One more time, for good measure: If it's happened once, then it's
happened a thousand times.
Once a liar, always a liar, and that's the Faulking Truth
by Mark Faulk
Commentary - Aug 18, 2006
From now on, don't believe a word of anything the SEC tells you.
Chances are, they're lying. In a courtroom, they call it "impeaching
the witness," Attorneys refers to it as the "Once a liar, always a
liar" scenario.
Over a year and a half after the story of a little company called
Global Links Corp. was first reported by the late Gayle Essary at
FinancialWire.net, Dave Patch of investigatethesec.com has exposed
major fraud on Wall Street, and a blatant cover-up by the SEC. In
that story, which was cited by Senator Bob Bennett in a Senate
Banking Committee hearing in March of 2005, where he questioned then
SEC Chairman William Bennett about naked short selling, 50 million
shares were traded in the first two days after a single shareholder,
Robert Simpson, bought every single share. In fact, another
shareholder, Paul Flotos, bought 15% of Global Links stockafter
Simpson bought 100% of the company, and both shareholders registered
their purchases with the SEC, claiming 115% combined ownership in a
company that was still trading tens of millions of shares on a daily
basis.
Now, Dave Patch has received, through the Freedom of Information Act,
SEC records confirming that over ten million counterfeit shares of
Global Links stock were dumped into the market immediately after the
company did a reverse split and reduced the total share count to just
over one million real shares. The brokers sold millions upon millions
of fake shares, and the SEC covered it up. In fact, almost six
million shares still remained undelivered as of the end of 2005. In
classic cover-up mode, by calling the counterfeit shares "long fails"
instead of "short fails," the recent list only shows 6,800 shares
short for Global Links. So…only 6,800 counterfeit "short fails," but
millions of "long fails." It's pure distortion of the facts, it's
disinformation, sleight of hand. A fail is a fail is a fail.
I repeat: Don't believe a word of anything the SEC tells you.
There are several ways that an attorney can discredit an individual
in a court of law. According to Wikipedia:
Bias-- The individual is biased against one party or in favor of the
other.
Inconsistent Statement-- The witness has made two or more conflicting
statements. By exposing his conflicting statements, you reduce his
credibility.
Character-- Show that the witness has a community-recognized
reputation for dishonesty.
Prior Criminal Acts-- If the witness has committed any crime
involving dishonesty (i.e. larceny-by-trick, embezzlement, fraud,
etc.) then the prior conviction is admissible under every
circumstance. The judge cannot refuse this evidence because it is so
probative of dishonesty.
Bias? Conflicting statements? A reputation for dishonesty? Prior
criminal acts?
Try "all of the above."
The SEC has been caught covering up fraud, plain and simple. And if
they've done it once, chances are they've done it a thousand times.
Once a liar, always a liar. If there's any justice left in America
whatsoever, Congress will launch an immediate investigation into this
scandal, and the media coverage will trigger a public outcry that
will topple the hierarchy from Wall Street to Washington.
But what about the major media? Will they jump all over this story
and expose the SEC and the Wall Street elite who are robbing
shareholders blind? Will NBC, CNBC, CBS, AOL/Time Warner, or FOX
protect America against the corruption on Wall Street, or are they
somehow also "biased against one party or in favor of the other?" For
starters, the New York Stock Exchange sits on the board of directors
of every one of those news organizations, and all of the top
brokerage firms and investment banks fill out the majority of the
remaining seats.
In short, every single major news organization in America is
controlled by Wall Street.
The only mainstream writer to discuss the Global Links story was
Carol Remond, and in a July 26, 2005 article called Global Links
Corp: The Real Story the Faulking Truth discredited her as a liar who
printed quotes that company never made, and who dismissed the 60
million shares traded in two days (when NO shares should have been
available for sell at any price) as brokerage firms legally shorting
the stock to "instill liquidity in the market."
How do you use the excuse of instilling liquidity in the market for a
stock that DOESN'T HAVE A SINGLE SHARE FOR SALE?
This is the SEC's own response to "Does NSCC's stock borrow program
create counterfeit shares?":
"NSCC's stock borrow program, as approved by the Commission, permits
NSCC to borrow securities from its participants for the purpose of
completing settlements only if participants have made those
securities available to NSCC for this purpose and those securities
are on deposit in the participant's account at DTC."
Over a year ago, we put it this way: "Where did those brokers expect
to find the shares to cover those trades, since they DIDN'T EXIST?
Answer: they didn't expect to cover those trades, just as they
haven't covered trades in thousands of other companies' stock for
years. They expect the SEC and DTC to just let them get away with
criminal counterfeiting, because THAT'S HOW IT'S ALWAYS BEEN."
And now, Dave Patch has the evidence in his hands that makes that
statement look prophetic. THEY STILL HADN'T DELIVERED THE MAJORITY OF
THOSE SHARES A YEAR AND A HALF LATER, AND THE SEC KNEW IT, AND
COVERED IT UP. In the words of Bud Burrell, "the Dave Patch article
makes this `game over.' This kind of brutal arrogance is nothing more
or less than simple treason."
In Bob O'Brien's article Dave Patch Exposes SEC Colluding With Wall
Street To Defraud Investors, O'Brien facetiously says "I suppose that
it is possible that the SEC ignored Bennett's instruction to
Donaldson to look into Global Links and figure out what was going
on," and follows it with the comment "It isn't remotely likely."
The SEC knew, they were fully aware of the Global Links situation,
and they covered it up. In fact, while they allowed brokers to sell
millions upon millions of counterfeit shares, they were busy
investigating Global Links - trying to discredit the company itself.
In our June 26, 2005 article, company representative Pat Donahoo said,
"At present, the Company is cooperating with SEC requests for
information. All of their requests, thus far, seem to be directed at
potential company wrongdoing, and nothing has been mentioned of any
victimization of the company or its shareholders. It feels like they
would rather find any way to blame everything on somebody else,
rather than accept responsibility for something that should never
have happened. It's a pretty scary feeling for a country where
freedom is supposed to be a reality!"
Why did the SEC go after the company instead of following up on
Senator Bennett's request to investigate evidence of naked short
selling in the Global Links case?
Why didn't they investigate Etrade, who was singled out by Wells
Fargo Bank as the main culprit in the failure to deliver shares to
investors trying to get their certificates?
Why didn't they go after the DTC, who allowed millions of shares to
be traded when NOT ONE share was available in the NCSS stock borrow
pool?
Why didn't they investigate Carol Remond, who lied about Global Links
in her articles, and clearly slanted her coverage to cover up the
fraud committed by Wall Street?
Why did they fail to even respond to numerous investor inquiries
about failures to deliver stock in certificate form? One shareholder
was told by his broker that his certificates "somehow got `stuck' in
the system," and another was informed that "the stock had a chill on
it."
This reeks of a massive cover-up, one that extends all the way from
Wall Street to the SEC, and one that implicates those in Congress who
have allowed it to continue unchecked. Wall Street robbed America,
the SEC covered the tracks, and the media concocted the alibis. And
Congress turned a blind eye to the entire robbery.
One more time, for good measure: If it's happened once, then it's
happened a thousand times.
Once a liar, always a liar, and that's the Faulking Truth
I wonder if thats why their auditors resigned, per their 8-K flied 3 weeks late,auditors don't just resign because they don't want to learn their job better,geees whats going on here???
Form 8-K for WINSTED HOLDINGS, INC.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
18-Aug-2006
Changes in Registrant's Certfying Accountant
Item 4.01 Changes in Registrant's Certifying Accountant.
The Company's auditors resigned on July 26, 2006, with out just cause. Winsted Holdings's CEO has made numerous attempts with its auditors and legal firms during the 2005 year to assure that the company was conforming to the rules and guidelines spelled out under the 1940 Act. The Company feels that its auditors are looking for a way out due to their lack of knowledge of the "BDC" registration and accounting guidelines under the 1940 Act. The company has since this time located a new auditing firm.
http://biz.yahoo.com/e/060818/wnsh.ob8-k.html
i_like_BB_stocks, you still holding AAGM?
I think you like it cause you like 1 eyed willies,lol...
Thanks for your reply,hoping for news Monday,
evensooner, what run? why are people talking about a run? Theres no news out. Are you expecting any?
laptop very well, GLTY & all. eom
laptop, are you sure you like it? Because it started to sound like you didn't, anyone that gets on here & first thing they say is 'HUGE FLOAT' kinda sounds derogatory,
laptop, what you mean a huge float, what stock you playing CSJJ?,now thats huge. Because ARET dosen't have a huge float.
As of May 22, 2006, Registrant had 282,655,754 shares of common stock, No par value, outstanding. Now you do know it can't be above that.
atotalbum surprised it wasen't willy. hummm.
mimurry, no actully not all of it just the parts about adding 2,000,000,000 shares, & trying to make it seem as if they are doing us a favor by buying back 600,000,000 shares that they won't file with the SEC, thats all I have a doubts about. now have a nice day before you give yourself a heartattack.
mimurry, very surprised that you would respond in such a way, hummm, very odd indeed, thats not like you. please get ahold of yourself & say what you really mean.
Thanks, Lucy, don't mean to badger you, could you tell us what email addy you used? it just seems odd that none of the email addys work on the webb site.
Lucyintheshy, I thought my question was clear enough, perhaps not, I meant did you ask by phone?, email?
Lucyinthesky, what was your avenue of communication?
mngtplayer, so for that matter who can prove the buy back even occured?, theres no SEC filing to prove it, or to hold them acountable, the financials are unaudited to me there worthless. just more smoke & mirror effects to me.
yes, we do have other opinions, & you're not the one being insulted by it are you? personally I'm just tired of reading the BS, ignorant post.
rationalreaper,sorry I disagree.
ha,ha,ha,u funny guy.atotal-willy!
atotalbum, whats wrong with you, check out the mans profile, he's been here since 1/10/01 long before willy got booted, so your claim of him being willy really hold no merit.
Frankly I'm tired of reading your post & wasting board space.
I think if it continues, we as a board should ban together & report this to Ihub Matt & request that you be incarcerated for a period of time for personal attacks. don't really want to do that but you are incessantly a atotal (pain in the &%$
please stop with the accusations.
cableguy.
Thanks foxy eom.
hey foxy, ya got a link for that article? seriously,...
No that was Zeninvestor32, Willy is from QBID board.
Joe Burmeister, Its a pink sheet stock they don't have to file anything, just a PR that explains their financials. second quarter ends on June 30th. it should have allready been out IMO. but sometimes they are late even for the BB's
metropick, all the pumpers just sold, thats my opinion they pump people buy then they sell, been going on for since the stock market opened, its called pump N dump.
tradergirl69
1) 1st of all I'm not your son & your not my mother!! Don't call me son again. I will invite you to the parking lot;
http://www.investorshub.com/boards/board.asp?board_id=37
2) That is my opinion any company that dilutes the O/S to over a trillion shares has got to have a devious plan.(when was the last time you saw a bid with the available O/S? and you think there will be a bid when they divy out the forward split,ha !!
3)Any CEO IMO,that tells their shareholders an excuse, that (the system won't handle the transaction) should have thought about that before they announced such a tromendous F/S, and if he didn't his Transfer Agent/Attorney should have. What is this kindergarden class They learn as they go?, BS.
4) I see you are new to trading, perhaps you should refer to
Posted by: tradergirl69
In reply to: DueDillinger who wrote msg# 1479 Date:7/6/2006 12:24:23 AM
Post #of 1583
everyone is entitled to their own opinion, God gave us all freewill. No one has to stay in a position they don't want to be in.
I will sell when there is a bid.
Posted by: tradergirl69
In reply to: uwlungman who wrote msg# 1512 Date:7/15/2006 4:36:24 PM
Post #of 1583
well when i called the transfer agent they told me that the reason for the delay is, the amount of shares after the split would have been too much for their system to handle.
It appears as if he dosen't know what he wants to be when he grows up;
http://www.pinksheets.com/quote/company_profile.jsp?symbol=CSJJ
Company Notes:
Formerly=WesPac Technologies Corp. until 9-02
Formerly=Strata Coal Co. until 11-02
Formerly=Delmar Management, Inc. until 1-03
Formerly=2energia, Inc. until 7-03
Current Capital Change:
shs decreased by 1 for 1200 split
Ex-Date:
Record Date:
Pay Date: 2003-11-20
Class Notes:
Capital Change=shs decreased by 1 for 125 split. Pay date=03/14/2002.
Stock Div.=5%. Ex-date=3-17-03. Rec date=3-10-03. Pay date=3-17-03
IMO, he will be forced to reverse split again as there will never be a bid again when he implements the F/S if he even does.
jdigilarmo, well when you dilute the pizz out of a stock what do you expect, a shot to the moon, he he, no way come on, all those millions of shares that went through & .0005 is all the high went up to, theres some BS going on & you don't need to be a rocket scientist to figure that one out. he's a straight up crook.