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.
ahhh ok, got it.
Thanks! I hadn't checked in for a bit and lost track.
Hoping we'll have some good news then shortly afterwards!
ah, ok.
So June 28th is the final decision about the stay of the chill but why on earth is the SEC not making it's decision on the chill itself if IPWG has resolved the share issue with the them? I mean the whole issue of whether it is hurting shareholders would be moot at that point. Sheese. We should hear something about the final decision shortly after the 28th then. Hoping they post more docs from these events as they happen on their website soon :)
The documents showing all the arguments against lifting the stay by the DTC on IPWG's website.
AND
The SEC is the one that denied lifting the stay!
"In its ruling, the SEC denied the requested stay of the chill pending the decision of the SEC on the legality of the DTC's actions that are currently presented in the administrative appeal. As such, the DTC chill shall remain in place. The SEC found that IPWG did not present sufficient evidence to prove that IPWG or its shareholders have suffered "irreparable harm" by DTC's actions and that the chill did not appear to "negatively affect the efficiency of the market in IPWG shares".
If the SEC is standing behind IPWG on this, as you say, that sure is a funny way of showing it..
Plain and simple question.. can you please inform me why the unregistered shares issue isn't resolved with the SEC as the DTC has asked.. or has it?
Thanks in advance.
I hear ya.
What seems odd to me is that in those documents on the IPWG website, it clearly shows where the DTC says that all IPWG has to do is resolve the unregistered shares issue with the SEC.
So why is the fight still with the DTC?
IPWG needs to let us shareholders know why the share issue isn't resolved with the SEC as asked by the DTC.
"The SEC has asked several questions of the parties and has set a schedule for further submissions to the SEC administrative appellate panel: (1) on May 13, 2010 the DTC will file its response to the questions raised by the SEC; (2) on June 14, 2010 IPWG submits its response and opposition to the DTC's response; and (3) on June 28, 2010 the DTC will file a reply to IPWG's submission.
A copy of the ruling and the Company's motion papers requesting a stay will be made available on the Company's website."
--
Should see the response from the DTC, i would hope, on or shortly after June 28th?
I'm wondering if this could be as simple as a easier way around the DTC chill?
I'm wondering if this could be as simple as a easier way around the DTC chill?
Nothing else we can do... :)
Actually Gapper, it is very common and procedural for lawyers to do such things. I was involved in a big company lawsuit at one time and the lawyers were constantly trying to have "stays" placed and removed on such and such while awaiting the actual hearing.
I think you are reading way too much into that one simple procedure.
What matters most now is seeing construction start-up and ultimately the decision made end of June by the SEC. IMO
I am following that quite clearly, Ebbtide.
I just hope you are correct in this part:
I'm sure IPWG has all unregistered shares accounted for. What we are experiencing here is due process. When IPWG satisfies the DTC's requests, showing that all shares are accounted for and that IPWG has fullfilled all requests documented by the DTC, then the chill will be removed.
I don't trust the DTC.
Time will tell end of June.
As important is any news of the construction breaking ground, etc in Poland.
I check news daily....
This would be very good news to see and it would speak volumes of the company's future success.
As far as all the "dentist, jersey, meet me, wagenti", and various nonsense on the boards. Meaningless.
Ipwginvestor, can you please tell me what the DTC's response was on the solutions offered?
Did they give reasons for a refusal or did they make their own demands or anything at all?
And let's not forget there is a precedent or two for this occurring with other companies regarding the DTC. One in particular did *everything* that the DTC asked to amend the situation yet the DTC never budged. you can do a web search and see this. That has always been a concern with me in regard to this company as well.
Perhaps the SEC is stating a denial on the stay being lifted because it *can* still be bought if one chooses to do so and feels it is just as important to let the potential purchaser know that there is an issue that is being investigated?
That *stuff* is the documents filed to do with the SEC and DTC chill, etc... how can you possibly complain or anything when you can't be bothered to ever read them?
Not trying to be nasty toward you at all.. just sayin'..
Honey, I agree :)
With that understanding agreed upon, Gapper, I now need to be made to understand why the DTC is being so hard-nosed in now accepting the proposed "fix" of the matter? I can't not find in the docs why the proposal was refused. I haven't fine tooth combed over them so maybe I missed something?
If anyone see's it, let me know please.
That's what intrigues me, Power.
They (DTC) haven't accepted an offered fix and haven't offered a solution either as far as I can see...
It will be interesting to see the docs posted in the next couple months in this regard.
Rod,
here it is again but I still think E*Trade could have chosen to trade it anyway as other shave.. that's where the catch is...
Account #: XXXX -
As a result of a complaint filed by the Securities and Exchange Commission ("SEC"), the Depository Trust Company (DTC) has suspended all settlement services for the following securities:
CUSIP SECURITY NAME
22743P100 Cross Atlantic Commodities, Inc.
294113105 Enzyme Environmental Solutions, Inc.
46018A100 International Power Group, Ltd.
761379106 Revenge Designs, Inc.
Because DTC has suspended settlement services in these securities, E*TRADE Clearing (ETC) has indefinitely suspended all trading in the securities outlined above. The position will continue to remain in your account. To view the complaint that resulted in DTC`s suspension of settlement services outlined above please see http://www.sec.gov/litigation/complaints/2009/comp21224.pdf.
If/ when more information becomes available we will communicate with account holders regarding the treatment.
Sincerely,
E*TRADE Clearing LLC
PLEASE READ THE IMPORTANT DISCLOSURES BELOW.
The E*TRADE FINANCIAL family of companies provides financial services that include trading, investing and banking.
Securities products and services are offered by E*TRADE Securities LLC, Member FINRA/SIPC.
Account #: XXXX - xxxx
As a result of a complaint filed by the Securities and Exchange Commission ("SEC"), the Depository Trust Company (DTC) has suspended all settlement services for the following securities:
CUSIP SECURITY NAME
22743P100 Cross Atlantic Commodities
, Inc.
294113105 Enzyme Environmental Solutions, Inc.
46018A100 International Power Group, Ltd.
761379106 Revenge Designs, Inc.
I had E*Trade at the time too and from memory I thought it to say they made the decision based on the DTC/SEC investigation regarding Signature Leisure.
Not that they *had* to but they *chose to* based on that letter...
unfortunatly in the finance world you are guilty until proven innocent ... or at least it seems that way (IMHO).
Rod
-------------------
On the other hand, Rod, I suppose it could be said that all parties are in agreement that there were indeed unregistered shares floating out there and that in itself is enough to hold the "chill" in place until the SEC completes it's investigation into the matter?
Hi power,
Ok number one..
Doesn't it show that they offered to put the same amount of registered shares in an account for the DTC? Do you see anywhere why the DTC refused this or if they offered up a better solution?
Number two:
I see what you are saying about Jon Benvengo using message board posts as evidence of hurting the stock PPS seeming odd since he said not to believe everything posted on boards BUT I wouldn't find it hard to believe that he also has these posters ready to back the posts up if need be?
Also, I have seen a few posts mentioning that this latest event equals IPWG not being able to get the chill lifted. I don't agree entirely as it hasn't gotten that far yet as the SEC has outlined a timeline in which they want answers from both IPWG and the DTC in order to make a decision.
This denial, as it appears to me, was simply a denial on lifting it before the final decision is made because the claim was made it is hurting the PPS.
Am I correct in this , in your opinion?
I thought IPWG had a valid case to that claim and felt the chill should have been lifted because I always believed innocent unless proven guilty.
I'm neither a pumper nor a basher, just a shareholder who of course would love for this to happen but I do see the reality that it may not..
Thanks for your courteous replies.
Lot of pages in those doc's on their site. I haven't a chance to go over them all.. yet, n regard to the unregistered shares.
Have you? Has anyone?
Right, it looks like the SEC is simply saying the chill is not being lifted until we have all the answers from both parties .. the DTC and IPWG in the timeline they outlined beginning in May through end of June.
To me that is like saying they are guilty until proven innocent but what do I know?
The docs on IPWG's website show everything taking place thus far with the SEC and DTC... it appears we now have to wait until end of June after all parties have submitted answers to the SEC before a final decision is made. Until then...
looks like the director from NaRec is terminated as of Jan. 14, 2010 to me..
14/01/2010 Adobe PDF format TM01 APPOINTMENT TERMINATED, DIRECTOR NAREC DEVELOPMENT SERVICES LIMITED
2 pages
£ 4.99
03/12/2009 Adobe PDF format AR01 07/11/09 FULL LIST
7 pages
£ 4.99
03/12/2009 Adobe PDF format CH01 DIRECTOR'S CHANGE OF PARTICULARS / ADRIAN JOHN RUSSELL SMITH / 01/10/2009
2 pages
£ 4.99
03/12/2009 Adobe PDF format CH02 CORPORATE DIRECTOR'S CHANGE OF PARTICULARS / NAREC DEVELOPMENT SERVICES LIMITED / 01/10/2009
2 pages
£ 4.99
03/12/2009 Adobe PDF format CH02 CORPORATE DIRECTOR'S CHANGE OF PARTICULARS / MAGNUM CAPITAL PARTNERS LIMITED / 01/10/2009
2 pages
£ 4.99
03/12/2009 Adobe PDF format CH01 DIRECTOR'S CHANGE OF PARTICULARS / MR PAUL ANTHONY SMITH / 01/10/2009
2 pages
£ 4.99
22/05/2009 Adobe PDF format 288a
View sample » Director Appointed ADRIAN JOHN RUSSELL SMITH
2 pages
£ 4.99
22/05/2009 Adobe PDF format 288a
View sample » Director Appointed NAREC DEVELOPMENT SERVICES LIMITED
2 pages
£ 4.99
22/05/2009 Adobe PDF format 288a
View sample » Director Appointed MAGNUM CAPITAL PARTNERS LIMITED
2 pages
£ 4.99
22/05/2009 Adobe PDF format 88(2)
View sample AD 31/03/09
2 pages
£ 4.99
22/05/2009 Adobe PDF format 122 DIV
1 page
£ 4.99
22/05/2009 Adobe PDF format 123 NC INC ALREADY ADJUSTED 31/03/09
2 pages
£ 4.99
22/05/2009 Adobe PDF format RES12 VARYING SHARE RIGHTS AND NAMES
16 pages
£ 4.99
11/02/2009 Adobe PDF format 88(2)
View sample AD 29/01/09
2 pages
£ 4.99
16/12/2008 Adobe PDF format 288a
View sample » Secretary Appointed PAUL ANDREW BROWN
2 pages
£ 4.99
09/12/2008 Adobe PDF format 288a
View sample » Director Appointed PAUL SMITH
2 pages
£ 4.99
10/11/2008 Adobe PDF format 288b APPOINTMENT TERMINATED DIRECTOR YOMTOV JACOBS
1 page
£ 4.99
07/11/2008 Adobe PDF format NEWINC
View sample ® Company Incorporation documents
9 pages
Don't get me wrong Da Chief. I agree with it being a bit smelly in that wrap around dealing but the fact of the matter is that it was on Sig Leisure to register the shares once the 6 months had passed , not IPWG's.
That's all I'm saying...
Signature Leisure was to wait the appropriate amount of time, 6 months, to then register the shares and is why they are named in the complaint as the "wrong doer"
Am I missing something here?
Some have argued that the end justifies the means.
Doing "something wrong" for the "right" of the company?
I'm not saying I agree entirely, I'm just sayin... ;)
I thought it was on Signature Leisure to register the shares after 6 months. Why are you saying it was on IPWG, Chief ?
haha It's onlllyyyy ipwg-wasteland!
This is what I could get pulled up:
01 Mar 2010
Poland / Biomass & Waste
IPG executes fund agreement for Polish waste-to-energy plant
Waste-to-energy company International Power Group says it has reached agreement for EUR 250m (USD 338m) in debt for the construction of a waste-to-energy plant in Koryciska in Poland.
The EUR 250m loan comes from Ifi Srl, a European private equity financier and will be issued in installments that will follow the construction steps of the project. The Florida-based company said it would be paid a management fee of EUR 5m when the first instalment of up to 10% of the total funds is paid out. The funds have a term of 10 years at a rate of interest equal to Euribor plus 3%. Interest and loan principal are not due until the Koryciska project is completed. The company’s shares (Pink Sheets: IPWG) have been bouncing wildly, rising nearly 80% two days before this news, only to fall almost 50% after it was announced. They trad...
I thought they already changed name from LTD, to INC. no?
Tell It Staight is correct. I do my trades through my Bank of America portal to Merrill Lynch. Free trades! Just make sure you request a Passcode card when you sign up because you need it in order to trade penny stocks online. Otherwise you have to call.
I traded a small amount IPWG through them this morning, just to see if it would go through. It did. I don't know why they would tell you that?
just saw a lot being bought at .004 millions and millions yet the price is sitting?
I transfered my shares from E*Trade to Merrill Lynch no problem. Merrill Lynch is trading.
executed = done! Right?
John could be pretty busy right now? But calm down Vic, I think the deal might be done... how is that? lol
Maybe you should send another text..