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.
Just my 2 cents worth.....think it can grow to a dollar? <g>
You must have given someone the idea to have 14 crappy posts since the 14 posts after yours seem to have been deleted.
sub grub!!!
Nice, catchy, slogan -- and forever unique to here!
That has to be against da law Troy
Yup, probably is, but what the heck, nothing is illegal unless one gets caught, right?
It was a cheap grub, a sub $1 grub if you will <g>, but a grub nonetheless.
That solution will solve the bookkeeping nightmare for the company and will allow settlement, rather than reversal, of all of the trades, but it will have no effect on the liability of the shareholder who sold shares he had no right to sell. The folks who bought from him still have some unresolved damage claims.
Depending on what state they are incorporated in, their proposed solution may not be legal (and may still subject the company to a damage claim) since it treats current holders of the same class of stock differently, to the detriment of one group. Essentially, the "solution" tells the group, we are going to give you what you bought, but then dilute it without diluting anyone else's holdings.
But, as I said initially, regardless of what was represented by the seller, he could only sell what he owned and had a legal right to sell.
This solves little more than trade settlement in form and gets their transfer account straitened out, again in form. It solves nothing with respect to the substance of the underlying problem and the losses that will be suffered by those who bought and held.
Hi Tom:
I am glad I worked until 4:00 a.m. this morning and missed the morning frenzy. Sold about a half hour ago for $31.30 from an average cost of around $22 and change. Now if it will just cooperate and retest the ~$27 range, which may be hoping for a bit much in the near term, all will be well with the world. I suspect that oil prices and their effect on the whole market are about all that could get me the cooperation I want, at least in the near term, but today's large gains will have to be absorbed.
It is nice to get six to twelve months of gains in one day. Just too bad it does not happen more often. Had I really been smart, I would have bought on the weakness over the past week, or at least picked up some options. The decline and weakness going into into earnings was confusing me and had me irrationally worried. Of course, hindsight is always 20-20.
JBL has become my favorite long term stock. It replaced SILI after VSH bought it out.
Tomorrow should be a nice day for JBL and it might push through the strong resistance at $30. Was hoping it might dip back to the ~$27 level before earnings this Q, but no such luck.
I assume you meant #msg-6666666.
Totally OT, but nice grub with message 6666666.
#msg-6666666
Just as soon as they get some of those CA babes to stop by for some "insider trading" and "hot tips." This could give new meaning to buy low, sell high. It could also make for some interesting short covering.
Who is your birthday present, Matt?
The Folio-fn board is now in the free zone.
#board-3946
That is close to what Alice though as well: eno shad haven esaec.
Edit -- really funny part is that only the last word failed the speel chucker.
Congratulations -- I had been tracking that one for a couple weeks, but got tied up on other things this morning. Was hoping it might have hit over the weekend.
It is an occupational hazard.
If I drop your name will I get a discount?
Laughed at or thrown out is more like it. I have some stroke in certain places, but that ain't one of them. I never liked the idea of things only getting straightened out without ever being resolved.
Your a customer I take it.
That would be "you're" were it relating to you and "your" were it relating to Susie's (aka Pamela's) $500 "prize.".
That said, I am way too cheap to even think about spending $500 on such things. My knowledge is solely from reading about it. Besides, were my frail memory not confusing fantasy with reality, I might be able to remember the days of $20 "entertainment" in Vegas. It may have been more than a quarter century ago and there may have been some inflation, no pun intended, since then, but not that much.
You're welcome to relate your own experiences. I, of course, would not have even known the name had someone else not mentioned it.
I think there were only one or two posts on that board about it afterwards. WTB decided to go pro se.
It was pretty cool, actually. I was laying in bed and it just started shaking the bed against the wall and the bathroom stuff was shaking and movie. Lasted only a few seconds.
We really did not need to know that much information about how you spent your time in bed. Guess you were either not at the Palomino or did not get your money's worth. See #msg-6646272, et seq.
Guess Matt should cut back on the KKD's and up the exercise before he makes his next trip to CA.
That is hardly an appropriate question to ask with a tag of $500. Then again, maybe it is the most appropriate question.
I am enjoying...well, I had better not go there.
Short answer, no pun intended, is a HUGE yes.
Ran across this...for a trip down memory lane. <g>
#msg-772998
I wouldn't call it a jig !!!
Jig + Palomino = Jig-alo. But you probably won't get $500 a pop each time you "win."
I wonder if i'll be able to unload mine !!!
I appears to have a "commission" cost of $500 if you want it googled.
I have to build up my funds again first!
That may be putting the cart before the Palomino, but a few more at $500 each and you should be good to go. Ride 'dem googles and hang on tight.
Make sure you pm me and let me know your coming. That way I'd at least stay at work to meet you instead of coming home early.
Hey, now, we don't need such explicit details online.
What was she doing in the strip club?
Googling it. Can't you read? And she gets $500 for it so she must be good at it.
I guess I will have to google it.
You should be more careful about giving away, no pun intended, such trade secrets. Make 'um pay to play.
$500 is what you got you say?
At 6:30 Pamela Anderson was helping him give away another $50,000. The last time I was down there my name was called and I won $500.
So I guess that means that you are not really Pamela Anderson? HUGELY disappointed. Then again, maybe you are and Trump has truly figured out the Vegas Art of the Deal.
Well all I can say is that Vegas will now be introduced to the Art of the Deal.
Or maybe Trump will get introduced to Vegas' interpretation of the Art of the Deal. Corporate culture notwithstanding, some things will never change.
Adelson ... believing the business model he embraced with Las Vegas Sands Corp. — making money off rooms and conventions versus gambling — is the true innovation that transformed Las Vegas.
It is true that free and heavily discounted rooms at the better places are harder and harder to come by. $200+ a night rates for regular rooms are pretty common. I have a trip to Vegas coming up in late September. Our "discounted" convention rate at Caesar's is $190 a night, which I thought I could easily beat, until I did some shopping around and regularly found the same nights at $250+. Of course, when they can fill it up at higher rates, they have less need to cater to gamblers and have significantly raised their average bet size expectations for room comps. Unless your average bet is in the $150+ range for the minimum four hours, you can forget about a room comp at many of the newer and "better" places.
Servicing the billion dollar plus debt requires more than gambling revenue.
What you guys trying to do, scare that boy to death.
This should: #msg-6633597
Beware when that pretty girl on the beach flashes the pearly whites.
Thanks, something I can finally plead guilty to....
Most dealers are manufacturers are also members of the local BBB which may have an arbitration process that is binding on them, but not you. It is worth checking out. I have seen some decent and fair resolutions through the BBB process.
So what you are telling us that Matt is mucking it up? <g>
Not that it may really matter, but it looks like the clock is off by ~20 minutes as well.
Would never have known if I had left the office four hours ago as planned.
Aim Constellation Fund - Class A.
Close -- it is actually Class screwed.
Only three responses:
1. Ouch
2. God help the poor guy when the woman consents and forgets. This would give new meaning to getting screwed.
3. I would not bet the house (or even a single nail, spike, or tooth) on this one.
I will resist, though it is tempting, to launch a series of one-liners. I'll wait and let Leno or Letterman do it.
Two lines from the article do merit mentioning:
Not everyone, however, is convinced of its usefulness.
You think? Duhhhhhh.
The device is to ... also be available in bulk packs.
At the risk of being politically incorrect, who would want to get within a mile of a women who felt the need to carry a bulk pack of these things.
The again, maybe I am just an insensitive prick.
But that doesn't relieve some criminal from responsibility or punishment that releases fraudulent news and falsified documents.
And doesn't follow SEC regulations for a public company.
As to the first, the best answer is that it depends. Just because a company releases false information (or in some cases information that later proves to be false) does not mean that every person in the company is guilty of a crime or that there has necessarily been fraud -- though there could be. It does not even necessarily mean that the CEO is guilty of a crime, though he could be. For example, though not in the public company context, I just spent four hours finding and beginning the process of fixing errors that we made on some IRS reports from 2002. Had we been a public company, the data that caused the errors could have also resulted in a false public report. On its face, the information we reported was incorrect since it was inconsistent with other information, but after looking into it, it was a clerical error (actually a combination of a misjudgment based on lack of understanding and then a clerical error) rather than intentionally false information. Again, had this been on a larger scale and related to a public company, many would have assumed that it was fraudulent just because it was false -- even though that assumption would have not been anywhere close to the truth.
I guess my point is that we should not be assuming that every release of information that is false makes everyone associated with it a criminal -- though sometimes that will turn out to be the case. It is true enough that there is sometimes activity associated with it that is criminal and when there is, it should usually (though not always) be prosecuted. But, there is generally a fine line between what is simply bad business (or the result of inexperienced business) and what is truly criminal -- even though the results are frequently the same.
As for the violation of SEC regulations, most of those are not, and should not be, crimes. There are thousands (if not tens of thousands) of such transgression every year. Thankfully, not every one of them results in a criminal prosecution.
My point is that most folks these days assume the worst any time there is something that looks suspicious. Our cynicism has conditioned us to expect and assume the worst in people anytime something goes wrong. Sometimes that is a prudent business practice, but sometimes it is just as wrong. Most of the time, it will be more than just a little while before we know for sure.
The mutual funds I'm invested in weren't ever affected directly...they were clean. But believe me there was enough of a fall-out to cause a substantial drop in my investments. Do you understand why I'm kinda bitter and resentful when there are unfounded accusations?
I do understand. I had some money in an AIM mutual fund so I was affected directly.
There will always be those who get ahead by cheating and stealing. Likewise, there will always be those who get ahead by capitalizing on panic caused by sensationalism. Neither ranks very high in my book. I am not willing to assume folks guilty of criminal conduct, despite the temptation to do so, just because someone, even someone who most respect, makes an allegation.
I just doubt that it is a coincidence that he has far greater political aspirations. There is one email I get regularly that pumps a service that makes shorting recommendations based on who else they think he may go after next. I did not pay to subscribe to this "premium" service.
Why would the CEO of CMKX take the fifth at an SEC hearing if he wasn't scared of criminal prosecution?
That one is easy -- lots of reasons, the first being that his lawyer told him to do so.
Being scared of criminal charges, which I hope everyone is (innocent and guilty alike) all of the time, and telling our stupid government to shove it, doth not make one guilty of any crime -- all as it should be.
The penny stock world is full of fraud and deception.
I don't doubt that it true, but why should my tax dollars be used to go after some guy when the vast majority of the people he dealt with knew going in that there was a good chance of fraud and deception? People take these risks and then expect the government to bail them out when it turns out as risky as they knew it was. You pays your money and you takes your chances. When someone takes a risk and it turns out as risky as they knew or should have known it was, let them spend their money and not my tax dollars going after whoever they think ripped them off.
Government should care about the innocent, but folks have their own responsibility not to be stupid, gullible, uninformed, or blind to risk.