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.
Fern, you accuse others of taking on a speculative tone to a detrimental fault, yet you end your own finger-pinting post with:
"Roman is likely distancing himself from Briscoe"
How is your own statement NOT speculative? The irony is thick. no?
TIA
oh oh..does this mean I won't get my sub penny bids filled today??
***sighhh***
glta
Big disapointment :9
Blood in the streets....capitulation??
My stink bids initiated @ sub penny levels.
GLTA
Fernace, thanks for your response. I honestly am not sure if you answered my questions.
In any event I certainly understand your viewpoints.
Remember to set your clock back 1 hour :)
GLTU
Institutional investor further validates the concept of a no brainer accumalation strategy here IMO.
Their #1 holding in their investment portfolio is a Uranium company.
They have scooped up a respectful early stage percentage ownership in a penny stock Uranium company?-LBSR. Imagine that.
Get in early, get in big, and wait.
I'm here for the long haul uranium potential.
GLTA
Yes. With or without briscoe at the helm....the URANIUM market future explosion, is virtually guaranteed.
I accumalate, and wait...for the inevitable. Time is on my side.
Simple as that.
GLTA
http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=66573855
Since the cat's out the bag.
It's all about URANIUM:
Own almost 5% of LBSR.
http://www.j3sg.com/Reports/Stock-Insider/Generate-Institution-Portfolio.php?institutionid=10342&DV=yes
Floyd, since you raise the logic issue. If I may:
"so with your logic, we would be better off investing in NAK because they own 60% of whatever is there...please don't try to be misleading."
This logic is severely flawed IMO. You will need to consider the contrasting SP of both entities pre/post positive drill results..allowing for variable LEVERAGE of intitial investor capital outlay.
A 10k investment in LBSR @40% j/v interest or a 10K investment @ 60% j/v interest would give an investor completely different leverage performance metrics; upon positve drill results.
FOR EXAMPLE...all things being equal for simplicity:
So a proportional increase of say 1000% SP gain in both companies, in real ROI terms of capital appreciation, LBSR would clearly obviously be a better profit proposition in this regard.
Your logic concerning risk ratio arguments must account for variances in the initial contrasts of SP for both entities.
SO theortically a better investment could very well be with LBSR only 40% with many more shares, than NAK 60% with alot less shares.
Do you agree?
TIA
Fernace, if I may.
I will oblige your concerns in turn. Please clarify?:
1."LBSR is in a DESPERATE position, not anyone here. The company is running out of money. Is that not concerning to you? Normally when one is strapped for cash it's stressful and becomes desperate when there is no light at the end of the tunnel"
Unless you are privvy about the CURRENT ongoing communications/negotiations between LBSR and possible interested parties, do you not agree those statements you alledge, are simply unfounded?
"How do you think a potential investor would view LBSR's position? They would lowball us with little cash at a substantial dilution. If you disagree explain how a deal could be structured so that we see more than .05, because I have and there is no way"
I can see your point here, a valid one for sure. But certainly, should we not consider the possibility: that maybe the reason why MLV is taking the necessary extended time, is to get the right package together, to avoid the past toxic mistakes?
But that would entail more time may be necessary on our parts. We are told in PR that MLV is at work NOW. However, by that same token inpatient investors are claiming the extended time is "proof" of non action of events, and no positive ends will result. I don't know how a retail investor can verify such a statement at this time.
Maybe i'm misunderstanding your points, but it just seems certain statements you offer; seem counter productive to your arguments at times.
TIA
RE:Private message post. Intriguing...Please feel free to share the LBSR "neat info", if you feel so inclined.
Either way, GLTA.
TIA
Just saw the news alert, Great news. Management definetly has plan in place, and are pursuing thier objectives "as advised". The warehouse rental makes more sense now.
Things are coming together so nicely here.
IMO, I don' t believe this PR released today was due to any shareholder whinning pressure. Regardless, we are being told, things are progressing along, and they have a plan of action.
The timing of this PR could be coincidental to ongoing behind the scenes actions.
MLV could be nearing completion of a major announcement?..just my .02.
I'm still silently accumalating.
Patience ones,will walk away with all the golden chips here IMO.
Have a great day all :)
GLTA
Agreed. Think it's safe to say, some frustrated holders just need to back away from the LBSR keyboards for a few weeks/months.
Nothing to talk about here in the meantime, we all just waiting for news.
Things are progressing nicely, slowly, but nicely.
Be back in a few weeks.
GLTA
Nice LBSR plan. Ofcourse there's always the lawyers...
Agreed, he is some kind of genious.
"Nevada, of course, has a long history of legal miner claims and this one is in some ways no different. Orbital Development of Carson City is behind the so-called “Eros Project” to ultimately mine the resources of that distant rock, a mining claim they claim is worth $10 trillion."
http://www.sciscoop.com/2003-11-10-123447-76.html
No reason why the warehouse's location couldn't be easily found out with minimal effort, if a shareholder wanted that info.
If I were in possesion of such information, I would personally respect the company's angle, by not releasing that information publicly.
This is the internet age afterall, anything can be had.
GLTA
It's my understanding a meaningful request is underway to attempt a shareholder meeting.
Long overdue. Not a bad place and time to throw such a hat into the ring imo.
Nice move. Now let's all hope our good ole uncle sam finds a way to keep his greedy fingers off those tax sheltered profits in the future.
Some very intelligent people I respect who are personally involved in congressional dealings; admits nothing could be off the tax table scheme in the next 10-15 years.
LBSR for some here including myself, is a hopeful ticket off this rock...maybe for good.
OR, approximately the same size of the tall tales being spun by some LBSR naysayers.
OR approx the same size of the future bucket of tears by those who missed loading the boat while it was cheap.
WILLYBURGD, I have attached a link to a document I am assuming the poster is reffering in regards to party related transaction --->
http://www.gasb.org/cs/BlobServer?blobcol=urldata&blobtable=MungoBlobs&blobkey=id&blobwhere=1175820909171&blobheader=application%2Fpdf
I fail to see what part of this requirement LBSR would be unable to "pass" regarding party related transactions of substantial value.
Maybe the poster would be so kind as to provide an actual reference link, and educate us as to the actual section of the FASB criteria LBSR would fall short per the allegations.
Very interesting concepts being raised imo.
I now realize I should have paid better attention in accounting theories. :
Deadjim,
After conducting extensive dd and conferring with my collegues on your post, it seems you are in error. It appears you are short one "z".
It's more appropriate to respond with 9 "z"s...in equal sets of 3 groups, with the required accompanying "..." denoting the proper book end.
Nontheless agreed: zzz zzz zzz...
GLTU
It seemed fine less than a month ago.
What has changed with LBSR within a few weeks?
http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=66951771
http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=67463739
What do you mean? Am I twisting the truth?
If you have truth to your statements, I have already said..I would be glad to see those. I am a shareholder here, if this CEO is involved in illegal ongoings, I won't sit lightly by.
Otherwise, we can speculate,eshew and proselytize till the perverbial cows come home. Which is quite alright by me.
As long as we all all understand what is LBSR fact, from fiction.
I think that is "reasonable".
"Who said anything about a legal requirement?"
I did. That is the entire point. throwing around statements regarding "related party transactions" as if he is potentially in violation of some legal requirement. My point is you must look to the standard to determine if he is not acting on behalf of shareholders.
I can find no legal requirement that he is in violation of, so your point of referencing these transactions are personal in nature...and legally moot...your personal percepetion is the issue...and are entitled to that.
To be fair, the way these transactions are being portrayed, to me at least, is bordering on giving the impression that something potentially illegal is, or has been ongoing regarding the CEO and shareholders.
Interesting that you mention "reasonable", this imo is the main issue here. Everyone has differening standards of what that really means.
Invariably, the law has the last say.
The answer to your question is yes. But as you know, this is not illegal in and of itself.
DO you have evidence to show the Briscoe has "abused" the allowance of such transactions, by not adhering to any legal requirements; to avoid being in violation of regulatory jeopardy?
Trust me, as you know regulatory bodies would be more than interested in that sort of evidence if you have it.
So far i'm reading this as an issue being judged on personal tastes, and personal ethical standards with no real bearing on illegality?
I agree, i would enjoy more transparency from management as well, I just don't see them in violations of laws as it stands imo.
The laws allow entrepenuers to run their companies as they see fit, as long as they adhere to certain legal requirements.
IS LBSR MANAGEMENT IN VIOLATION OF ANY LAWS?
TIA?
Strange fill action for me today..hmmm. Getting partial fills below my bid...was trying to slap at .038 earlier but filled @ .035..but only partial fills.
My 2 stink bids still lurking below 0.03 were auto cancelled from yesterday even thought I have GTC.
Time to call my broker.
Anyone else getting strange fill action today?
"LBSR share holders have not been given details of the transaction, yet the transaction appears to have already occurred."
If I may,
It is my understanding that there is no legal requirment that shareholders must be notified "beforehand" of corp transactions (RELATED PARTIES OR OTHERWISE,UNLESS dealing with potential r/s, forward splits etc) are completed.
In fact the only requirement is that the transaction must be noted in the company's 10k.
Further, regarding the level of "details" offered in such a transactual filing, there is no clear legal standard regarding "how much" detail must be included. But at least the "parties involved, the amounts, type of transaction, dates involved, and maybe possible reasons.
I'm not sure that the level of details you seem to be seeking is a legal requirement.
Maybe I am misunderstanding a legal requirement you may be privy to? Do you have any information that contradicts my notion, I would be glad to read it.
TIA
I will answer your questions in turn.
"lilpuppy, how do you figure that ?"
Well for starters, we can see from the POST IPO performance, nothing too much out of place there...typical to see 50%+ losses. However, I have noted the breakneck speed at which "developments" are occuring, mixed in with direct email marketing schemes in full deployment mode...my personal experience tells me...usually this means bad news...for the PPS neart-term.
Most penny stock investors know all too well the dire consequences of buying and holding speculative equities that are being heavily marketed.
http://ih.advfn.com/p.php?pid=webchart&btn=s_ok&ctl00%24sb3%24tbq1=Get+Quote&as_values_IH=&ctl00%24sb3%24stb1=Search+iHub&symbol=OTCBB%3ASAGE&s_ok=Get+Chart&period=4&drawmode=0&size=19&volume=1
I am not suggesting SAGE is a fraudulent company, only that the tactics that are being employed are unfortunately typical of such entities, and will most likely be received as such. Most penny flippers will react positively to the email marketing hype, load up, then dump...hence the coming lower prices theory IMO.
"Michael Vick, he was part of the sporting / entertainment work.
No big deal there. Who really cares how many shares he has anyhow? Really. "
Hmm... I would think it's an interesting question to try to suss out..because we all know all too well the background of said individual, I am making a personal judgment by insinuating that if he has been compensated to "hype" up this stock, then my opinion is that there already may be a strategy in motion to p&d...even unawares by management. I would want to know the amount of shares he MAY potentially have available to dump. Just my 0.02.
"So, tell me - what are you basing your numbers on ?"
Again, from my own trading experience, and the potential of p&d situations, especially with michael vick already hyping up this company.
I like the potential here especially with LBSR/NEWCO; But I just won't feel right owning shares at current speculative levels. I personally believe it will go lower in the interim. I'll sit on the sidelines for things to shake themselves out for now. Won't be too much longer till we find out the trend direction IMO.
If I'm wrong, and it soars to dollars, I will certainly be happy for all shareholders here. I can't win them all.
For you,it means you will get to brazil sooner.
GLTU
Current SAGE prices appear to be be severely overvalued.
May be worth a nibble somewhere south of .10 IMO.
I wonder how many shares Michael Vick owns?
I grew up on a farm, I know the value of what good LBSR fertilizer can do. Thanks.
My bucket is wating to be filled @ .03 or below.
TIA
"Would be interested in knowing what all our shareholder rights are"
Some basics, by no means a complete list:
http://www.usinvestorlaw.com/investor-rights.php
The SEC has a semi-useful website as well:
www.investor.gov
Realitically, a securities attorney will advise you of any "relevant" additional rights that may be confered upon you as an investor, depending on an actual issue at hand...lot's of gray areas, requiring intrepetations of fact, or lack thereof.
I hope this helps.
GLTU
Unfortunatley, as much I agree with your personal assessment, in the legal arena these sloppy mistakes can have dire consequences.
Thsi is like ford or GM building cars and forgetting to attach the steering wheels in the factory.
You would wonder..and scratch your head.
I hope I might be forgiven for pointing out that there is a glaring and significant issue with the INVEST US corporate website.
1. A more than curious issue, is the disturbing fact that the legal descriptive found on bottom right of page currently reads:
"Invest US Regional Center LLC © 2011 All rightsa reserved"
Anyone with a more than fleeting experience of legalese can see the obvious and epic failure of this meaningful oversight.
I'm surprised the legal team validating the online content was not fired IMO.
Alas, my personal unease will be Put to rest one way or the other in the next couple of months.
For clarifications, it is no such my issue with the vetted deep pocketed individuals; but more so regarding the uncanny break neck speed of events.
Yes, they have hired experienced persons to rely on, and have general business savvyness; but that is not always a surefire recipe for success....especially when you are delving into an entirely new enterprise, especially where one has no personal experience in.
The x-factor remains.
There is always a danger of biting off more than one can chew, and bungling up things due to IMO.... appearing to rush into the fray after quick PM profits.
Time will tell..tick tock.
GLTA
Something just doesn't feel right about sage. I honestly can't say what it is at this point. Maybe i'm just not used to such fast paced events in the PM arena.
Time will tell.
END OF YEAR
Apologies, I was under the apparent silly opinion that people who buy subpenny stocks are doing so, as a strict speculative venture.
Hmmm...this new strategy you have revealed to me.......waiting to buy a speculative equity,until it's it's no longer speculative...but yet by the same token, you hedge your speculative bet by buying equity risk as a hedge against speculation?
I would imagine you would have waited to buy a single share until all resources are proven...to avoid the spec nature alltogether.
I have alot to learn it seems. Thanks for clarifying.
You are wating until it gets more expensive before buying more? I just want to make sure I read you correctly?
TIA
"But at current share prices and given the timeline to production, the company may feel as though other smaller-scale and near term projects fit the company objectives better"
Interesting indeed.
GLTU
With a REALLY BIG magnifying glass hanging from the metal ceiling over it.