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.
No hope for the stock. It will be worthless.
The Company requested to the Court that its Bankruptcy be converted from Chapter 11 to Chapter 7, which the Judge indicated he would approve. Chapter 7 is automatic liquidation. The common shareholders are dead last in line for assets, and since there is ZERO chance of having enough assets to pay off the massive amount of liabilities and debt, there is no chance that shareholders will receive anything at the conclusion of the bankruptcy process.
COWI has made investors Hundredaires! If they are lucky that is, since the current market cap of the company is about $22,000. COWI is worth less than a new car! Someone holding 10% of the currently issued and outstanding would have stock worth about $2,200!
Who in their right mind actually thought this insolvent lying POS with a LONG history of multiple pump and dumps was actually real and could change the world without two nickels to rub together?
I don't know how they did it, but the SEC somehow was able to include even LESS information on the new home page than they did before. Even without the inclusion of the 3 giant rotating stock photos. It is, as you say, now requiring even more clicks to get somewhere useful than it did under the old design.
The site no longer even tries to be user friendly, especially for the individual investor. It now has a sterile and harsh industrial look I find very off-putting.
It ain't great. It is very much non-intuitive, which seems to be the exact opposite of what they say was their goal.
And what is especially frustrating is that IMO a lot of the redesign elements are better, but they are not only arranged wrong, but their labeling is crap. They dumbed it down with their wording, but not their use. It is a very poor compromise between the needs of professional users and the general public, and in the end it works well for neither one. It is really a mess.
I do have one nice thing to say about the redesign, though. I am thrilled I never have to see those same 3 rotating PC stock photos on the home page ever again, but each is seared into my brain. The Asian family riding bikes, the minority couple sitting down talking with (presumably) a financial advisor, and the oddest one, the two professional woman leaning over a cubical wall with one of them talking into a old cell phone like it is a walkie-talkie (push to talk is SO year 2000!). What the hell is that one about, and what did it ever have to do with the SEC?
The SEC prepared an E-mail notice entitled "Upcoming Changes to EDGAR Webpages on SEC.com" dated June 28th which gave subscribers details of the changes they would be making that weekend and where the rearranged pages would be found.
Sounds great, but they sent it later in the morning on Monday, July 1st. After the changes had already been made and after many users had already seen the new site and lost all their bookmarks.
Very (non) helpful.
And you would be wrong about that.
Some posters here actually have a brain and understand how stocks work. And what toxic death spiral convertibles do to a company, and what pump and dumps are.
COWI doesn't have long to live. Good riddance.
COWI is insolvent. They have NO MONEY, and are sliding into the expert market. The chances of them completing the audit, completing and filing the delinquent 10-K, then filing the delinquent 10-Q, all in the next 2 weeks, are damn slim. Especially since they have no money. They can't even afford to buy a cup of coffee, much less pay the auditors and their other professional service providers necessary to complete and file.
COWI is about to become completely and utterly worthless. Those that may have listened and won't get stuck holding a worthless and untradeable stock with a 100% loss won't think any of my FACTUAL posts were a waste of time, would they? Just those stupid and stubborn enough to not pay attention to the facts and are somehow thrilled to lose it all to Lloyd Spencer's lies and grifting.
Do you realize that COWI is about to be kicked to the Grey Market for lack of current information due to their extended delinquency with the SEC? In about 10 days to 2 weeks, COWI will essentially no longer be tradable, and everyone will be stuck with their stock regardless.
That should be fun, huh? Great investment decision.
I agree. I think Cohen has spoken to Kitty, but they are not working together. What would be the benefit to Cohen? The risk of being ensnared in Kitty's possible reporting and market manipulation issues would be infinitely higher than any long-term benefit he would obtain. Besides, their goals seem somewhat at odds, as Cohen is (usually) a long-term investor who actually gets in there and gets his hands dirty "fixing" companies. Kitty, on the other hand, is all about the short-term momo. If he actually had long-term investment aspirations, he wouldn't be dumping that much money into short-term options.
Kitty is nothing but a star-struck fanboy who seems to desperately want Cohen's attention and admiration. He definitely has the first, but is unlikely to get the second in any meaningful way.
Sure, feel free to donate more of your hard earned money to Lloyd and the toxic death spiral convertible funders. Surely they are more deserving of your cash than you are, right?
I have a policy not to come back and tell the fools who lost all their money on obvious scams like COWI "I told you so" after they get wiped out and the crooks have absconded with their money. But since you would like me hang around until the end, I will make an exception for you. I will certainly be here to remind you how stupid you were not only buying shares of this obviously worthless insolvent pump and dump in the first place, but then buying more when revocation by the SEC can come at any time, any day, without any warning. Be sure of it.
COWI's vast insolvency is unusual. It is not a common trait among penny stocks to be $25 million in debt with only $166k in assets. That is remarkably incompetent.
COWI IS DELINQUENT. Their extension periods ran out long ago. They only get 5 extra days for a 10-Q and 15 extra days for a 10-K. In both cases, they told the SEC they would definitely file their 10-Q and 10-K before the extension period ran out. They lied. But what else is new with Lloyd Spencer? The SEC is now revoking companies that are as little as 6 months from their last filed period. COWI hit the 6 month limit yesterday, which means the SEC can begin revocation proceedings against them at any time. Once they do, the stock will cease to trade and be revoked. Anyone dumb enough to be holding shares will lose 100% of what little they have left.
COWI's spin-off has not filed anything with the SEC to continue the registration process since January. My statement was factual and correct.
The stock has lost 99.99% of its value. Its current market cap is $21k, which is $21,000 more than it is worth.
It does, but even if he is communicating with Cohen, I doubt he is working with him per se, as I don't think the purchase of Chewy benefits Cohen in any way.
I think he is just more of a fanboy following in Cohen's footsteps.
But I do think Chewy is a much, much, MUCH better investment than GameStop is, but maybe not as good of a trade.
Buffett doesn't telegraph his purchases to his followers before filing the required regulatory paperwork. That would be illegal.
And that is where Kitty's perceived cleverness may land him in very hot water. HIs tweeting of the Chewy Dog to his followers after he bought the stock, but before he disclosed his greater than 5% position in a regulatory, is likely a violation and would be considered pumping.
Actually, there is no "standard form" for Schedule 13D or 13G. The SEC has a set form for pretty much everything else, but for some reason they don't have one for Schedule 13 filings. Instead, the Exchange Act (240.13d) details what needs to be included in the filing, but doesn't say you can't add other things. Therefore, as long as he included all the information required under the Exchange Act, which it appears he did, his inclusion of "I am not a cat" is not strictly prohibited.
He is pretty damn clever. But perhaps too clever for his own good.
After this stunt, the SEC may decide to make a standard form for those Schedules to prevent others from doing what he did in the future.
Facts are facts.
COWI is insolvent. FACT.
COWI is serious delinquent in their reporting obligations. FACT
COWI's purported spin-off has done nothing since January. FACT
If they don't file soon, which they won't since they have no money, they will be revoked and disappear forever. FACT
The "doom and gloom" is all factual. Too bad. People should have gotten some brains and not bought this very obvious pump and dump.
Yes, I said that.
"That acquisition would never have been necessary if they hadn't sold off Spirit in the first place".
The use of Boeing Wichita/Spirit has never been very efficient. For instance, the 737 fuselage is manufactured whole in Wichita, then wrapped in essentially saran wrap, loaded on LONG completely open flatbed rail cars, and moved via a very circuitous route by rail north and then west through Montana to Boeing's Renton plant. They don't arrive in ready to use condition, which requires a lot of reworking by Boeing and that is what led to the Alaska Air 737 Max blowout.
COWI is DEAD. The pump and dump has run its course and Lloyd and his cronies have moved on to their next scheme.
How is that not abundantly clear to everyone by now? They never filed their last 10-K or their 10-Q, and are soon to be a second 10-Q behind. That is the point that the SEC is now beginning to revoke issuers, and once that happens COWI will be gone forever.
And where are the spin-off shares? They filed their initial registration in January, and nothing since. The SEC will likely terminate that soon as well due to inaction.
This should not have been a surprised to anyone. COWI was a VERY obvious pump and dump that was completely insolvent. They were slinging complete BS about JV's and bogus technologies whose only purpose was to get suckers to buy so Lloyd and the toxic death spiral convertible holders could dump as many shares on them as possible before the company went under.
That acquisition would never have been necessary if they hadn't sold off Spirit in the first place. What a freaking disaster that has been. Boeing's decision to get rid of their component manufacturing in-house and delegate it to unrelated suppliers has been a major, if not THE MAJOR, component of their problems ever since.
Yes, but I think it has been scheduled for a while. I don't know what it will entail, but it will be interesting to see what they do to the public facing display for EDGAR, if anything.
EDGAR is rarely down for maintenance. In Canada, SEDAR is down for maintenance pretty much every weekend these days, which is too bad as the weekend is when a lot of individual investors want and need the access the most.
Wall Street Cop Finra Goes Quiet on the Beat as Its Caseload Plunges
https://finance.yahoo.com/news/wall-street-cop-finra-goes-103056104.html
(Bloomberg) -- Two days after Christmas, a prominent Wall Street regulator updated a database with news of interest to the industry: A $1.4 trillion brokerage had been slapped with one of the year’s biggest fines for allegedly losing track of almost a million trades.
But there was no press release when the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority hit LPL Financial Holdings Inc. with the $6 million penalty. Nor did Finra seek attention for its multimillion-dollar sanctions of Goldman Sachs Group Inc. and Barclays Plc months earlier.
The quiet end to those probes capped a year in which the number of enforcement actions brought by the brokerage industry’s self-funded regulator slid to the lowest level in its history. Total fines picked up last year but are down by about half since a peak in 2016. Meanwhile, Finra’s headcount and budget have expanded.
The declines are raising concerns that the watchdog isn’t policing firms with the same aggressive posture it adopted after the 2008 financial crisis and multibillion-dollar Ponzi scams by brokerage operators Bernie Madoff and Allen Stanford, both of which went undetected for years.
Finra rejects the idea that it has pulled back on enforcement. But some are raising the question: Will the regulator catch the industry’s next big fraud?
“Right now, there’s no big crisis going on,” said Brad Bennett, Finra’s enforcement director from 2011 to 2017. “The tide is in, but as sure as the sun rises in the east, the tide will go out. And people will be wondering: Where the hell was Finra?”
The changes at Finra have frustrated some enforcement staff, who have pushed the regulator to more aggressively pursue and promote cases, according to people familiar with the matter. In multiple instances in recent years, employees drafted press releases to promote cases, only for managers to spike their publication, the people said.
Last year, the regulator issued press releases on just 10 of 426 enforcement actions, compared with 63 in 2015. Finding details on cases like LPL’s can require digging into a cumbersome Finra database.
Finra says it hasn’t strayed from its mission.
“There is an important reason why there are fewer enforcement actions: Finra has reduced the number of bad actor firms and individuals over time,” Ray Pellecchia, a spokesperson for the regulator, wrote in a reply to Bloomberg’s questions. “Any suggestion that we have let up on our regulatory focus is just dead wrong.”
Finra said it has improved rules that keep bad actors from being brokers, leading many to operate in industries that it doesn’t regulate — like insurance. It prioritizes cases that involve repeat offenders and customer harm. And the regulator said it tries to address multiple matters in one enforcement action when appropriate, which tends to decrease the total number of actions.
On press releases, Pellecchia said issuing too many of them would dilute the impact of enforcement actions it wants to emphasize. Finra also publishes them in a monthly newsletter and two databases, he said.
A spokesperson for the SEC, which oversees Finra, declined to comment. The SEC’s enforcement numbers stayed relatively steady even as Finra’s fell.
Gary Carleton, a former senior counsel at Finra, said he has no reason to believe that there has been decline in financial crime, including in areas that Finra regulates. “To the contrary, with the growth of so many more financial platforms, the use of social media and direct messaging, there is far more opportunity for abuse that is harder to detect,” he said in an interview.
When asked about the drop-off in enforcement, Senator Elizabeth Warren said she planned to investigate.
“Finra’s job is to protect investors and hold big financial services firms like Goldman and Barclays publicly accountable when they don’t follow the rules – but they can’t do that if they take the cop off the brokerage beat,” Warren, a Massachusetts Democrat, said in an emailed statement to Bloomberg.
Finra was created in 2007 through a merger of self-regulatory organizations. It serves as a beat cop for brokerages and exchanges, helping to track stock and option trades in US markets. Each year, it feeds reams of tips on suspicious trades to the SEC.
The watchdog emerged as an influential force in the US effort to toughen regulation after the 2008 financial crisis. In addition to regularly fining major banks for misconduct, it played roles in probes of Wall Street spoofing and aided in the SEC investigation into hedge fund titan Steve Cohen.
But Finra’s hands-on, in-person and dogged examinations exasperated many brokers, according to two former board members.
“I felt that examiners came in with the idea that they were going to find violations, and it was just a question of how many,” Mark Cresap, a money manager in the Philadelphia area, said in an interview. His firm, Cresap Inc., manages about $1 billion in assets.
Examiners would spend months at a time at his firm, Cresap said. Finra, he said, was devoting too much time scrutinizing small, well-intentioned companies and not enough time looking at firms trying to skirt the rules.
Broker Joe Romano, president of Romano Brothers & Co., said Finra’s oversight often fixated on minor violations rather than major fraud.
Perceived overregulation has even driven one firm to challenge the constitutionality of parts of Finra. That case is making its way through the appeals process.
New Chief
In 2016, Robert Cook, a former white-collar law partner and SEC official, took the helm of Finra. The year before, Finra had a record high of 1,147 enforcement actions, based on the number of settlements and complaints filed by the regulator. Finra’s internal statistics on disciplinary actions show a higher count, though a similar decline over the years.
In one of his first major actions, Cook launched Finra360, described as a “comprehensive self-evaluation and organizational improvement initiative.” Finra needed to modernize, streamline and engage more with brokers, he said.
One of Romano’s messages — echoed by other brokers — was that Finra had to cut down on the number of enforcement cases and increase their quality. That feedback quickly made its way into Finra policy.
At an industry conference in New York in February 2018, Susan Schroeder, Cook’s then-head of enforcement, announced her priorities. She said they were driven by Finra360.
“Enforcement action, while a powerful tool in Finra’s toolbox, is not the right tool in all cases,” Schroeder said in her speech. “In fact, we must be thoughtful and intentional in order to use our finite enforcement resources in the matters where they are most needed.”
In 2018, Finra brought 557 enforcement actions, nearly half the 2015 mark. Company expulsions and broker suspensions decreased. Finra combined two enforcement divisions into one, explaining that it would lead to a “more effective and efficient” unit.
‘Precipitous Drop’
The changes in approach led to a “precipitous” drop in enforcement, said Justin Chretien, a senior official in Finra’s enforcement division from 2011 to 2021. The department was streamlined, and there was more transparency for brokers under investigation, he said, but productivity declined.
Schroeder, now a partner at the law firm WilmerHale, said in an email that she gave the speech to explain Finra’s approach to enforcement. For enforcement to be effective, “it has to be predictable, transparent and risk-based,” she said.
She added that Finra’s enforcement and surveillance units had “undergone significant changes in the past several years and during times of change, productivity often slows.”
Finra360 didn’t lead to a reduction in the number of enforcement actions, Finra’s Pellecchia said. Rather, it focused on making enforcement more efficient and consistent, he said.
Tim Scheve, a Finra board member and former CEO of Janney Montgomery Scott, said it didn’t feel like there was less enforcement. “Finra continues to be an aggressive regulator,” he said.
LPL Settlement
In LPL’s case, the lack of a press release was notable not only because of the fine’s amount but also due to the size of the company, which includes affiliated brokers that don’t usually do business under the firm’s banner.
The alleged lapses were also extensive. According to Finra, LPL failed to track hundreds of thousands trades its brokers made on behalf of clients – and neglected to check whether those investments were appropriate for them. For 2 million other transactions, LPL didn’t collect required data on investors, like their ages and investment needs, Finra said.
LPL’s $6.1 million payment to settle the probe amounted to about two days of the firm’s profit in 2023. An LPL representative didn’t respond to emailed requests for comment. The company didn’t admit to or deny the allegations. Neither did Goldman Sachs nor Barclays.
There’s value in shining a light on such cases, said US Representative Katie Porter, a California Democrat and law professor. When you don’t, “you are losing the deterrent effect,” she said.
Yes, I noticed that, too. I don't exactly know what it entails, but I would not be surprised if it involves further public pumping and dumping of the stock by certain different individuals and/or paid promoters online.
We all know that went on - hopefully the SEC will nail them down.
That is exactly what I expected to hear from the accused. Continue to deny, deny, deny and blame the invisible naked short sellers.....until the trial. I would give better than 2-1 odds they will eventually plead guilty when they hope most of the suckers who fell for their crap have forgotten.
SEC Charges Meta Materials and Former CEOs with Market Manipulation, Fraud and Other Violations
https://www.sec.gov/news/press-release/2024-77
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
2024-77
Washington D.C., June 25, 2024 —
The Securities and Exchange Commission today filed charges against Meta Materials Inc. and its former CEOs, John Brda and George Palikaras. The company has agreed to settle the SEC’s charges in an administrative proceeding, while the SEC’s litigation against Brda and Palikaras will proceed in federal district court.
The SEC’s complaint against Brda and Palikaras alleges that, as a result of a concerted market manipulation scheme, Meta Materials, a Nevada corporation headquartered in Dartmouth, Nova Scotia, Canada, raised $137.5 million from investors in an at-the-market (ATM) offering in June 2021 immediately prior to the merger of Brda’s Torchlight Energy Resources Inc. and Palikaras’ Metamaterial Inc. that formed Meta Materials.
The SEC’s complaint, filed in U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York, alleges that Brda and Palikaras planned and conducted the manipulative scheme that included, among other things, issuing a preferred stock dividend immediately before the merger. The complaint alleges that Brda and Palikaras told certain investors and consultants—and hinted via social media—that the dividend would force short sellers to exit their positions and trigger a “short squeeze” that would artificially raise the price of the company’s common stock. The SEC further alleges that Brda and Palikaras also misrepresented the company’s efforts to sell its oil and gas assets and distribute proceeds to preferred stockholders, giving investors a false impression of the value of the dividend. While investors held or bought the company’s common stock to receive the dividend, the complaint alleges, the company was cashing in by selling $137.5 million in an ATM offering at prices that the company, Brda, and Palikaras knew were temporarily inflated by their manipulative scheme. “We have two days,” the complaint alleges Brda told Palikaras after the first day of the ATM offering, “to take advantage of the squeeze...”
“The conduct we allege was a sophisticated, yet brazen plan by a public company and its former CEOs to purposely mislead investors in the company’s stock,” said Eric Werner, Director of the SEC’s Fort Worth Regional Office. “This conduct is particularly alarming because it involves public company CEOs who were more concerned with ‘burning the shorts’ than creating long-term value for shareholders.”
The SEC’s complaint charges Brda and Palikaras with violating the antifraud and proxy disclosure provisions of the federal securities laws, and charges Brda with aiding and abetting Meta Materials’s violations of the reporting, internal accounting controls, and books and records provisions. The complaint seeks permanent injunctions, officer-and-director bars, and civil penalties from both defendants. The complaint also seeks disgorgement with pre-judgment interest from Brda.
The SEC also instituted a separate administrative proceeding against Meta Materials, entering a settled order finding that Meta Materials violated the antifraud, reporting, internal accounting controls, and books and records provisions of the federal securities laws. Without admitting or denying the findings, Meta Materials was ordered to cease and desist from violations of the relevant provisions of the federal securities laws and to pay a $1,000,000 penalty.
The SEC’s investigation was conducted by Christopher Rogers and Ty Martinez of the SEC’s Fort Worth Regional Office under the supervision of Samantha Martin, B. David Fraser, and Mr. Werner. The SEC’s litigation against Brda and Palikaras will be conducted by Patrick Disbennett and supervised by Keefe Bernstein.
A separate Commission investigation regarding subsequent events related to Meta Materials (MMTLP) remains ongoing. If you are an individual with information related to this investigation or any other related suspected fraud and you wish to contact the SEC staff, please submit a tip at SEC.gov.
So much for MMTLP naked short theory. According to the SEC, it was all made up as the most important component of the fraud.
SEC Charges Meta Materials and Former CEOs with Market Manipulation, Fraud and Other Violations
https://www.sec.gov/news/press-release/2024-77
Washington D.C., June 25, 2024 —
The Securities and Exchange Commission today filed charges against Meta Materials Inc. and its former CEOs, John Brda and George Palikaras. The company has agreed to settle the SEC’s charges in an administrative proceeding, while the SEC’s litigation against Brda and Palikaras will proceed in federal district court.
The SEC’s complaint against Brda and Palikaras alleges that, as a result of a concerted market manipulation scheme, Meta Materials, a Nevada corporation headquartered in Dartmouth, Nova Scotia, Canada, raised $137.5 million from investors in an at-the-market (ATM) offering in June 2021 immediately prior to the merger of Brda’s Torchlight Energy Resources Inc. and Palikaras’ Metamaterial Inc. that formed Meta Materials.
The SEC’s complaint, filed in U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York, alleges that Brda and Palikaras planned and conducted the manipulative scheme that included, among other things, issuing a preferred stock dividend immediately before the merger. The complaint alleges that Brda and Palikaras told certain investors and consultants—and hinted via social media—that the dividend would force short sellers to exit their positions and trigger a “short squeeze” that would artificially raise the price of the company’s common stock. The SEC further alleges that Brda and Palikaras also misrepresented the company’s efforts to sell its oil and gas assets and distribute proceeds to preferred stockholders, giving investors a false impression of the value of the dividend. While investors held or bought the company’s common stock to receive the dividend, the complaint alleges, the company was cashing in by selling $137.5 million in an ATM offering at prices that the company, Brda, and Palikaras knew were temporarily inflated by their manipulative scheme. “We have two days,” the complaint alleges Brda told Palikaras after the first day of the ATM offering, “to take advantage of the squeeze...”
“The conduct we allege was a sophisticated, yet brazen plan by a public company and its former CEOs to purposely mislead investors in the company’s stock,” said Eric Werner, Director of the SEC’s Fort Worth Regional Office. “This conduct is particularly alarming because it involves public company CEOs who were more concerned with ‘burning the shorts’ than creating long-term value for shareholders.”
The SEC’s complaint charges Brda and Palikaras with violating the antifraud and proxy disclosure provisions of the federal securities laws, and charges Brda with aiding and abetting Meta Materials’s violations of the reporting, internal accounting controls, and books and records provisions. The complaint seeks permanent injunctions, officer-and-director bars, and civil penalties from both defendants. The complaint also seeks disgorgement with pre-judgment interest from Brda.
The SEC also instituted a separate administrative proceeding against Meta Materials, entering a settled order finding that Meta Materials violated the antifraud, reporting, internal accounting controls, and books and records provisions of the federal securities laws. Without admitting or denying the findings, Meta Materials was ordered to cease and desist from violations of the relevant provisions of the federal securities laws and to pay a $1,000,000 penalty.
The SEC’s investigation was conducted by Christopher Rogers and Ty Martinez of the SEC’s Fort Worth Regional Office under the supervision of Samantha Martin, B. David Fraser, and Mr. Werner. The SEC’s litigation against Brda and Palikaras will be conducted by Patrick Disbennett and supervised by Keefe Bernstein.
A separate Commission investigation regarding subsequent events related to Meta Materials (MMTLP) remains ongoing. If you are an individual with information related to this investigation or any other related suspected fraud and you wish to contact the SEC staff, please submit a tip at SEC.gov.
https://www.sec.gov/files/litigation/complaints/2024/comp-pr2024-77.pdf
Lots of videos online of the Boathouse Amphicar trips around the Disney Springs Lake. It is a unique experience that I have never done myself, but wouldn't say no to.
SEC Charges Colorado Mining Company and its Executives with Fraud
https://www.sec.gov/litigation/litreleases/lr-26032
Western Sierra Resource Corporation, Roger Johnson, and Dennis Atkins
Securities and Exchange Commission v. Western Sierra Resource Corporation, Roger Johnson, and Dennis Atkins, No. 1:24-cv-01705 (D. Colo. filed June 18, 2024)
SEC Charges Colorado Mining Company and its Executives with Fraud
The Securities and Exchange Commission announced today that it filed charges against Colorado-based penny-stock issuer Western Sierra Resource Corporation, its Chief Executive Officer Roger Johnson, and its Chief Financial Officer Dennis Atkins for issuing false and misleading statements concerning Western Sierra's alleged purchase of gold mining claims worth billions of dollars.
The SEC's complaint alleges that for over two years, from June 2021 through at least October 2023, Western Sierra, Johnson, and Atkins made materially false and misleading statements concerning the acquisition of certain gold mining rights in multiple press releases; quarterly and annual submissions filed with the trading platform Over-the-Counter Markets; and on Western Sierra's website. According to the complaint, Western Sierra, through Johnson and Atkins, claimed it had paid $10 million for an interest in a company that purportedly owned more than 640 acres of Bureau of Land Management mining claims within the State of Nevada. In fact, the complaint alleges, Western Sierra did not pay $10 million for these purported mining claims and indeed did not own any mining claims at all.
The SEC's complaint, filed in federal district court in Denver, Colorado, charges Western Sierra, Johnson, and Atkins with violating the antifraud provisions of Section 10(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and Rule 10b-5(b) thereunder. The SEC seeks permanent injunctive relief as well as civil penalties as to all defendants, and officer-and-director and penny-stock bars as to Johnson and Atkins.
The SEC's investigation was conducted by Abigail Edwards and supervised by Kimberly Frederick, Nicholas Heinke, and Jason Burt, all of the Denver Regional Office. William Connolly of the Enforcement Division's Office of Investigative and Market Analytics assisted with the investigation. The litigation will be led by Jodanna Haskins and supervised by Gregory Kasper, Mr. Heinke, and Mr. Burt.
https://www.sec.gov/files/litigation/complaints/2024/comp26032.pdf
SEC Charges Colorado Mining Company and its Executives with Fraud
https://www.sec.gov/litigation/litreleases/lr-26032
Western Sierra Resource Corporation, Roger Johnson, and Dennis Atkins
Securities and Exchange Commission v. Western Sierra Resource Corporation, Roger Johnson, and Dennis Atkins, No. 1:24-cv-01705 (D. Colo. filed June 18, 2024)
SEC Charges Colorado Mining Company and its Executives with Fraud
The Securities and Exchange Commission announced today that it filed charges against Colorado-based penny-stock issuer Western Sierra Resource Corporation, its Chief Executive Officer Roger Johnson, and its Chief Financial Officer Dennis Atkins for issuing false and misleading statements concerning Western Sierra's alleged purchase of gold mining claims worth billions of dollars.
The SEC's complaint alleges that for over two years, from June 2021 through at least October 2023, Western Sierra, Johnson, and Atkins made materially false and misleading statements concerning the acquisition of certain gold mining rights in multiple press releases; quarterly and annual submissions filed with the trading platform Over-the-Counter Markets; and on Western Sierra's website. According to the complaint, Western Sierra, through Johnson and Atkins, claimed it had paid $10 million for an interest in a company that purportedly owned more than 640 acres of Bureau of Land Management mining claims within the State of Nevada. In fact, the complaint alleges, Western Sierra did not pay $10 million for these purported mining claims and indeed did not own any mining claims at all.
The SEC's complaint, filed in federal district court in Denver, Colorado, charges Western Sierra, Johnson, and Atkins with violating the antifraud provisions of Section 10(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and Rule 10b-5(b) thereunder. The SEC seeks permanent injunctive relief as well as civil penalties as to all defendants, and officer-and-director and penny-stock bars as to Johnson and Atkins.
The SEC's investigation was conducted by Abigail Edwards and supervised by Kimberly Frederick, Nicholas Heinke, and Jason Burt, all of the Denver Regional Office. William Connolly of the Enforcement Division's Office of Investigative and Market Analytics assisted with the investigation. The litigation will be led by Jodanna Haskins and supervised by Gregory Kasper, Mr. Heinke, and Mr. Burt.
https://www.sec.gov/files/litigation/complaints/2024/comp26032.pdf
I am going to suggest something else about the Seminal Church and BMXI.
I think it is an intentional gag. Whoever is behind the scam that is BMXI also created the Seminal Church to see who is stupid enough to believe both of them.
They are trolling their marks.
Just like the naked short selling BS the "church" is promoting on their YouTube channel.
They are laughing all the way to the bank ripping off the ignorant, gullible and stupid. And enjoying both their foolishness and their money.
This certainly would not be the first time stock scammers have intentionally left clues to their inventions.
BMXI claimed the site visit would begin on April 29th. No airports were closed on that date.
Flights were cancelled on April 18th and 19th, and May 2nd. The airport was fully operational on the dates the company claimed would be the site visit.
More BS from this scam company.
I don't give a crap if you care or not. But, experienced investors certainly do, and so do the regulators.
Just more proof this company is a scamming POS that is lying to appeal to the lowest common denominator, i.e., idiot uninformed investors that somehow ignore the facts and believe their made-up BS.
Slashes are NEVER used when referring to NI 43-101. Or N43-101, Or whatever incorrect, made-up spelling they use. If you had any experience or even basic knowledge of the industry you would know that.
It is complete BS. It is really proof they are lying know-nothings who are just making it up as they go along.
I suggest you stop digging. That hole of yours is getting really deep.
NI 43-101 is a LAW. It has specific requirements for compliance.
It is akin to a 19 year-old resident of Nevada travelling to Florida and wanting to go to a bar to drink. He doesn't like Florida's law that only those 21 and older can drink. So, although he has no connection to Canada whatsoever, and the bar he is going into isn't located in Canada, he decides to invoke British Columbia law that allows 19 year olds to drink.
You know how stupid that would be? And how doing something like that, such as a US company using a Canadian law on a property in Indonesia, sounds to those with even 1 iota of knowledge and experience?
Clearly, we are not dealing with smart scammers here. They are stupid, and appealing to the stupid who know nothing about mining and mining regulations. Which is probably why a company that claims to be EARNING in profit about $7 million a year is using Reg A to sell stock worth far less than that. MASSIVE RED FLAG. If anyone in the industry thought they were honest and actually earning that much in annual profit, they wouldn't need to file a crappy Reg A to sell that pitiful amount of stock.
What does a date have to do with the spelling of a law? Any half-way competent professional with even a little experience would know what NI 43-101 is and how to spell it. They don't.
You know, you really should pay attention to the old saying that when you find yourself in a hole, stop digging.
This is from an SEC filing that they spelled it 4 different ways in a single document, of which 2 were spellings I have never seen before. And that is really saying something.
Everywhere I look on this stock are multiple red flags. No question in my mind it is a pump and dump at best, if not an outright fraud.
Perhaps you missed the part where they state they will get "NI/43-101" reports in the future?
NO ONE abbreviates it that way.
Only an idiot who knows nothing about what NI 43-101 actually is would misspell it that way.
If they have one, why can't they spell it correctly?
So spelling the standard 4 different ways in one document is not a mistake and an indicator they don't know what they are talkking about?
Yeah, right.
N43-101 IS very obviously a misspelling. And NI/43-101 is also a misspelling. No one has ever called it that using the slash. Any qualified geologist and any experienced issuer would know that.
Try again. Just because you can google something you don't understand in no way proves your misguided and incorrect point.
Do you actually READ what you post?
Here is the important part of what you cut and pasted:
"but comply with a foreign mining code such as Canada’s NI 43-101?"
The all important word there is "comply".
This company DOES NOT, AND CAN NOT, COMPLY WITH NI 43-101!
Therefore, they inclusion of any document that claims to be an "NI 43-101" document is FALSE at best, but most likely fraudulent. They don't have any except for one document prepared for the compliant Canadian issuer they merged with which is now non-compliant under NI 43-101 due to its age. But their claims that they will prepare NI 43-101 documents for their Indonesian properties is a fraudulent lie.
In order to comply with NI 43-101, a Company must be a Canadian issuer AND file the document with the Canadian regulators for their review. The Company is neither.
There is a reason why the SEC told them, multiple times, they must comply with US mineral reporting standards and forced them to remove their NI 43-101 BS.