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.
jking -
Okay - just so I'm not missing out on a joke.
jking - Why do you keep referring to Tifford as Talbot?
Is there an inside joke I'm missing?
Allstate - A ten day suspension is the most the SEC can do unilaterally. To remove a stock from trading permanently takes a judicial process.
Under ten grand of covering cannot precipitate a squeeze.
neediamonds - Unless he failed to turn over the tapes, I'll guess nothing.
With under ten thousand dollars in short interest, it is absurd to think a short squeeze can happen.
Allstate - Suspend and halt are two different things. Now that RA is gone and the suit against usxp is public information, a 10 day suspension is not really appropriate.
Allstate, The SEC cannot unilaterally remove a stock from trading.
The share audit showed shorting of usxp to be de minimis, which means inconsequential.
RA did not present anything to the court to counter that. If he disagreed with that finding he could have had another audit done by someone else, but he didn't.
How about all the false and misleading press releases. Are you OK with that, too?
Doesn't it bother you that RA claimed the Jackson tapes belonged to USXP when he was hyping the stock but now that he can't print/sell any more paper he says they are his personal property? Do you think that's right?
If RA and Gundy by some miracle win the appeal, all it means is a new trial.
A NY jury, after seeing the 911 victims press release, will probably come down harder on them than the judge did.
Be careful what you wish for.
Someone earlier spoke of "guilt" and "conspiracy."
Those are terms used in criminal cases.
This is a civil case. It's not a choice between "Guilty and "Not guilty", its "Judgment for the plaintiff" or "Judgment for the defendant."
Summary judgment for the plaintiff against defendant USXP was ruled and is not being appealed.
That bell cannot be unrung.
USXP did not appeal. Only RA and Gundy did.
Even if the appeal is granted, it changes nothing re USXP.
Al - USXP went into receivership with millions of dollars in unpaid bills. The receiver sold off the meager assets. USXP is for all intents and purposes gone (and as facts have emerged, it has been revealed there was really nothing there to begin with). The appeals court boogie applies only to RA and Gunderson's cases as they try to forestall the inevitable. There's also a contempt hearing coming up soon.
The grandfather clause ended without any of the short squeezes promised by the NSS brigade. It appears cherished myths are hard to drop for some.
RA and Gundy are going to have some 'splaning to do about all those "consulting" checks next time they appear in court.
Yes, but unfortunately neither Jane nor the SEC can bring criminal charges. If the US Atty fails to do so, RA wins.
Judge Lynch has been quite lenient so far. Overly so, IMO.
He has given RA and Gundy ample time to hide any swag the court doesn't know about.
USXP did not appeal, only RA and Gundy.
I wonder why Bud is still lying for RA.
When did lying in press releases become an attempt to stem corruption?
They are expediting the appeal process because the DOJ is waiting.
Shareholders have already lost. RA is now trying to save his own skin.
jking - It would appear RA/Gundy are in the "say anything, just keep stalling" mode. They may still be trying to hide some money.
All the false and misleading PRs issued to facilitate dumping by the "funders" belie that laughable claim of good faith.
Susan Sarandon was Janet in Rocky Horror
Soon to be an eight digit number, if there's any justice.
re: "hey Dick, the name is Richard or Mr Altomare"
RA was printing and selling unregistered shares.
That is counterfeiting!
If someone issues counterfeit shares, they should be punished, too.
I'm surprised you don't care RA lied to you. Are you that way with everyone or just stock scammers?
Wrong about what, RA saying he was a Captain? It's in an early 10K. Look it up.
RA made intentionally false and misleading statements in press releases and interviews, then sold unregistered paper to those who believed him.
Do you *really* think that is acceptable and he should not be punished for it?
I think any CEO who lies to increase the value of his company's stock should be prosecuted for fraud.
re: "He didnt write it."
The lie about being a Captain? Oh yes he did. He put it in a 10K. After the "bashers" proved it was a lie, he did not repeat it.
You don't care that RA lied so much? Wow!
USXP was not "naked shorted" to any significant extent.
RA dumped unregistered shares and used NSS as a smokescreen to hide it.
It worked, for a while. Then reality set in.
The conversations will taper off once RA is in prison.
It is not.
re: "It possible to have a CEO and functioning subsidiaries again by the end Jan. is it not??
If he did, he wouldn't, but he didn't.
Case 1:04-cv-02322-GEL Document 222 Filed 11/05/2007
9. On or about April 13, 2006, Richard Altomare purchased an 11.02 ct emerald-cut
diamond from Les Bijoux LLC in Boca Raton, Florida for approximately $500,000. (Item 20 of
the Seized Property listed above in paragraph 7.) Richard Altomare paid Les Bijoux for the
diamond with wire transfers from the bank account of Universal Express, Inc. in the following
amounts: on April 13, 2006 a wire for $325,000, on April 26, 2006 two wires for $30,000 and
$40,000, on June 5, 2006 a wire for $33,900, on July 27, 2006 a wire for $30,000 and on August
21, 2006 a wire for $50,000. Richard Altomare misappropriated these funds from Universal
Express, Inc. to pay for this diamond. In the annual report for Universal Express that Mr.
Altomare signed on March 27, 2007, he did not list any of the payments to Les Bijoux as part of
his annual compensation. See the Summary Compensation Table at page 41 of 49 in the
Company’s annual report on Form 10-K for the year ending June 30, 2006, which is attached as
Exhibit H. The only compensation that Mr. Altomare identified for 2006 in Exhibit H is his cash
salary of $650,000, which was paid to him in bi-weekly payroll checks.
10. On or about January 26, 2007, Richard Altomare purchased from Les Bijoux a
7.00 ct radiant cut fancy yellow SI1 diamond ring set in platinum for $85,000 (Item 21 of the
Seized Property listed above in paragraph 7), a Jaeger LeCoultre Atmos Clock for $40,000,1 and
a FP Journe Chronometre Souverain platinum watch for $20,000 (Item 14 of the Seized Property
listed above in paragraph 7). Richard Altomare made partial payment for these items in three
wire transfers of funds from the bank account of Universal Express in the following amounts:
$20,000 and $40,000 on January 26, 2007, and $20,000 on May 16, 2007. As of approximately
September, 2007, Altomare owed Les Bijoux $65,000 for these three items. Richard Altomare
misappropriated the funds from Universal Express, Inc. to pay for these three items. In the
annual report on Form 10-K for the year ending June 30, 2006, which was filed on March 26,
2007, Altomare represented that he was currently employed under an employment contract that
provides an annual base salary of $650,000. See Exhibit H at page 42 of 49.
I strongly urge you to read the court documents, particularly the receiver's second report.