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.
It's definitely nonsense. What's really infuriating is that it's nonsense spouted by an IHUB board mod.
Sorry Howard, you a flat out wrong. Restricted shares are not registered, but they are most certainly counted as outstanding. Curiously, you and spicemike suddenly came to the same erroneous conclusion. Did Jean Michel give you this information?
PS. I am saving this post to send to admin if it gets deleted.
anybody heard this one before?
Posted by: Howardhaftel
In reply to: roiresearch who wrote msg# 14419 Date:7/10/2007 3:23:50 PM
Post #of 14426
SEC rules state that shares held in restriction for 2 or more years are not accounted for as Outstanding shares.
lexit, looking at those announcements in your post made me wonder, how did umng acquire a control position in a TSX venture company, and additional claims in the Mount Otish region? We know they don't have cash, they announced that they acquired the claims back in February, by acquiring an existing mining company for shares of glxi stock. Then, in March they announced that another 15 million shares were issued for acquisition costs, consulting fees, and key employee compensation, and they got $150,000 from a note from Cortellazzi to cover operating costs. That brought the outstanding shares to 49 million. So, how do they keep the outstanding under 50 million in light of the additional acquisitions announced in June?
Thu, Jun 07, 2007
8:30 AM U Mining Resources Inc. Acquires Control Position of TSX Venture Corporation - PR Newswire
Mon, Jun 04, 2007
10:05 AM U Mining Resources Inc. Announces Strategic Acquisition of Uranium Rich "Mount Otish" Territories - PR Newswire
Awesome numbers gadawg! Did the PR's mention when the company acquired the claims and how much they paid for them? Must have cost a fortune.
jimmy, I think a more relevant question is, why were those instances not fully and publicly resolved by the taskforce? Wasn't that their stated agenda, and would that not be the ultimate proof of their unstated assertions?
otherwise WHY cant several people I know STILL cant get certs?
Phil, thanks for your response. Unfortunately, I agree with your answer based on the current interpretations of board mods and reinforced by actions of the admins.
But, is the status quo ultimately in the best interest of this site, it's owners, and it's members? By not allowing the true nature of these miscreants to be seen in the most relevant forum, aren't we reinforcing this unethical behavior?
Regarding the term "personal attack" in the ibox for this board, when a poster has consistently supported and promoted proven egregious pump and dump momentum stocks, how can his posting history be considered off limits? Whether past injurious posts were caused by complicity with the company's deception, or a shocking display of naivete, should they not be allowed as relevant in regards to any current positions being purported by that poster.
So my question is, can a poster's credibility be attacked by referencing previously posted "ideas" without being considered a "personal attack"?
Credit to Richard Palm for this:
Q. What is a "personal attack"?
A. In essence, a personal attack is attacking a person, rather than a person's ideas. The written word provides wide latitude for the most fervent of debates: efforts to short-cut the debate process by attempting to discredit or disparage a person rather than a person's ideas usually fall into the personal attack category.
Same to you! It's suppose to be 117 tomorrow, so there will be plenty of liquids involved, both internally and externally.
And what if it is? The shareholders fate was sealed long ago, by Urban and Edwards and the rest of the crooks. The best that could possibly happen now, is for Frizzell to extract a bit of revenge, and possibly a bit of cash from the bad guys. I'm rooting for him, I hope he gets paid for every billable hour he puts into chasing these guys down.
He's still naive to think this thing will ever trade again, or, if he still thinks some kind of payout from a naked short is still a viable goal. But hey, all I can say is - GO GET 'EM BULLDOG!
stockseekerok, I've never seen the trust. Was there ever a trust properly set up and recorded? From all accounts, Stocklein has possession of the cert.
Maheu was taking his cues from Stocklein, not the other way around.
Stocklein knew it. No way he would distribute in any other fashion without a court order. Still won't.
All those lawyers and not one of them knew that the only legitimate place to determine the rightful owners of a corporation is with the transfer agent's stock ledger?
Grand Jury Criminally Indicts Cyberkey CEO for Stock Fraud and Cover-Up
U.S. SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
Litigation Release No. 20171 / June 29, 2007
SEC v. Cyberkey Solutions, Inc. and James E. Plant, Civ. Action No. 07 1084 (CMR) (E.D. Pa, filed March 20, 2007); Crim no. 07-375
Grand Jury Criminally Indicts Cyberkey CEO for Stock Fraud and Cover-Up
The Securities and Exchange Commission ("SEC") today announced that a Pennsylvania federal grand jury criminally indicted James E. Plant, the CEO of CyberKey Solutions, Inc. ("CyberKey"), on charges of securities fraud and lying to the SEC during its probe of a scheme Plant orchestrated to pump up the price of Cyberkey's shares. Plant is alleged to have given false testimony to the Commission about Cyberkey's purported business dealings with the U.S. Department of Homeland Security ("DHS"), the receipt of payments under a DHS contract, and a purported business relationship with an intermediary company.
The two-count indictment charges Plant with orchestrating a fraud scheme in which he personally made in excess of one million dollars selling Cyberkey shares at inflated prices while lying to the public about Cyberkey's business prospects and management.
According to the indictment, Plant was responsible for disseminating, in an effort artificially to inflate the price of Cyberkey's shares, numerous false and misleading press releases between December 8, 2005 and March 15, 2007. These press releases contained materially false and misleading statements concerning 1) a fictitious $24.5 million purchase order that CyberKey supposedly received from DHS, when as Plant knew, that DHS purchase order did not exist; 2) revenues and profits that CyberKey had supposedly realized from the fictitious DHS purchase order, when as Plant knew, CyberKey did not receive, and did not expect to receive, any revenues or profits from the fictitious DHS purchase order; 3) Plant's false representations that Cyberkey's financial statements were in the process of being audited and would be released in the near future, when as Plant knew, CyberKey did not expect to release audited financial statements in that time period; and/or 4) Plant's false representations that the failure of the company to realize revenues from the DHS contract was the result of both improper accounting practices used by a company officer, and a third-party's actions to circumvent CyberKey as the middleman of the DHS purchase order, when as Plant knew, the lack of revenues from the DHS purchase order resulted because there was no such purchase order with DHS.
The Commission's civil fraud complaint against Cyberkey and Plant covering the scheme, filed on March 20, 2007, further alleged that CyberKey had no business relationship at all, either directly or indirectly, with DHS, and generated no revenues whatsoever from any such relationship.
Today's criminal indictment charges Plant with securities fraud, in violation of 15 U.S.C. §§ 78j(b), 78ff; and making a false statement to the Commission, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1001.
Plant was arrested on March 13, 2007, in St. George, Utah, by agents of the FBI's Philadelphia Economic Crimes Squad and the United States Postal Inspection Service on charges of securities fraud and aiding and abetting securities fraud. One week later, the Commission filed its civil case against Cyberkey and Plant for engaging in an ongoing unregistered offering of Cyberkey shares while promoting the bogus DHS purchase order.
For more information, see Litigation Release No. 20049
http://www.sec.gov/litigation/litreleases/2007/lr20171.htm
10-K due by end of the month, (or extension notification).
chiefjunki, the company won't be buying back shares because the company doesn't have any money. You've been around long enough to know you can't believe anything Jean Michele PR's.
iswt, you must be new here. The company already has a financing deal in place with some pretty big hitters:
Press Release Source: Globex, Inc.
Globex, Inc. Signs Asset Leverage Financing Agreement with Trimax Capital Group LTD.
Wednesday March 7, 8:30 am ET
NEW YORK, March 7 /PRNewswire-FirstCall/ - Globex, Inc. (GLXI: Pink Sheets), today announced that it has signed a financing agreement with Trimax Capital Group LTD; a Calgary, AB Corporation.
Pursuant to the significant Uranium discovery on 2 of its properties, Globex Inc. has negotiated an asset leverage program of structured notes based on the value of the proven reserves discovered.The unique agreement establishes the basis of an ongoing open structured notes asset-based system. It allows Globex to obtain the required working capital to begin Uranium extraction via the proceeds from the notes and most importantly does not result in any share dilution and maintains the book value of the Company's reserves.
Trimax Capital Group LTD specializes in financing natural resource projects in the oil and gas and mining fields. Trimax's financing program is offered in collaboration with companies such as: Nomura, Pali Capital, Dresdner Bank, JJ Wall, and Bear Stearns among others financial organizations. For further information on Trimax visit: www.trimaxcapitalgroup.com
Globex Management stated: "This agreement represents the first step towards generating significant revenues for our Corporation and permits us to save considerable time in this crucial phase of our development schedule."
Management also announced that is in the process of preparing both a SB-2 Filing and audited financial statements in order to become a fully reporting Corporation according to the standards set by the Governing authorities.
Forward-Looking Statements
Please be advised that statements made herein, other than historical data, constitute forward-looking statements that involve risks and uncertainties that could cause actual results to differ materially from those stated or implied by such forward-looking statements. The potential risks and uncertainties include, among others, potential volatility in the company's stock price, increased competition, customer acceptance of new products and services offered by the company, and uncertainty of future revenue and profitability and fluctuations in its quarterly operating results. Please also be advised that the company's stock is not currently registered with the Securities and Exchange Commission.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Source: Globex, Inc.
Thanks dog. You know, I'm not sure if it was intentional or not, but you've helped me immensely over the last few months. Again, thank you.
Jean Michel, this sentence of yours looks highly suspicious.
U Mining can then make a final decision on the closing date of the audited financial statements in preparation for filing form 10 to up list on the OTC.BB
The "closing date" would be your most recent fiscal year end. You've been in business for a number of years already, your fiscal year end is well established.
Also, Jean Michel, while I'm on the subject of "highly suspicious", why are you wasting energy and financial resources to uplist this pinky, when your control group already owns a reporting mining company on the OTC.BB (M45)? I'm always curious when someone takes the long way to get where they claim they want to be.
Lexit, we seem to be on the same page.
LOL roi, you really are a "glass half full" kind of guy.
The last "institutional finance group" they announced they had signed a deal with, shrivels up and disappears in a couple of months. And that's because the last "institutional finance group" was no more than a front for other entities affiliated with Jean Michel.
yup ice, the share buyback program to battle the nefarious short is right out of the cortellazzi pink sheet play book. Nice post documenting that fact.
Interesting, sometime since my last visit to www.trimaxcapitalgroup.com the site has become no longer available. The following pr had a significant impact on glxi/umng's run to 40 cents, and now it's almost as if they never existed.
Globex, Inc. Signs Asset Leverage Financing Agreement with Trimax Capital Group LTD.
Wednesday March 7, 8:30 am ET
NEW YORK, March 7 /PRNewswire-FirstCall/ - Globex, Inc. (GLXI: Pink Sheets), today announced that it has signed a financing agreement with Trimax Capital Group LTD; a Calgary, AB Corporation.
Pursuant to the significant Uranium discovery on 2 of its properties, Globex Inc. has negotiated an asset leverage program of structured notes based on the value of the proven reserves discovered.The unique agreement establishes the basis of an ongoing open structured notes asset-based system. It allows Globex to obtain the required working capital to begin Uranium extraction via the proceeds from the notes and most importantly does not result in any share dilution and maintains the book value of the Company's reserves.
Trimax Capital Group LTD specializes in financing natural resource projects in the oil and gas and mining fields. Trimax's financing program is offered in collaboration with companies such as: Nomura, Pali Capital, Dresdner Bank, JJ Wall, and Bear Stearns among others financial organizations. For further information on Trimax visit: www.trimaxcapitalgroup.com
Globex Management stated: "This agreement represents the first step towards generating significant revenues for our Corporation and permits us to save considerable time in this crucial phase of our development schedule."
Management also announced that is in the process of preparing both a SB-2 Filing and audited financial statements in order to become a fully reporting Corporation according to the standards set by the Governing authorities.
Forward-Looking Statements
Please be advised that statements made herein, other than historical data, constitute forward-looking statements that involve risks and uncertainties that could cause actual results to differ materially from those stated or implied by such forward-looking statements. The potential risks and uncertainties include, among others, potential volatility in the company's stock price, increased competition, customer acceptance of new products and services offered by the company, and uncertainty of future revenue and profitability and fluctuations in its quarterly operating results. Please also be advised that the company's stock is not currently registered with the Securities and Exchange Commission.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Source: Globex, Inc.
Why do I feel like I'm watching an elaborate game of Bonneteau? Step right up gentlemen and keep your eyes on the claims!
I have to admit, Jean Michel has had me scratching my head as to what his next move would be. The only constant being every move is that of a promoter, not a businessman. It seemed as if this company was a ship without a rudder. But on closer inspection, the captain is in complete control of the ship, but is constantly changing the course he wishes to take.
What happened to the TSX venture company? The next pr was supposed to identify the company and go into more details, instead, he issues a pr about a jv with another pinkie, with hopes of getting a piece of their pie in the sky. Is it possible that you might have forced Jean Michel to shelve the unveiling of the TSX company, Lexit?
Wow dog, that's really gonna put a crimp in your investing style.
Naahhh... financials pretty simple really. All the pinks gotta show em now.
rics, how come you don't have Citibank or the Pope on your list?
HndtoHnd, my point is, every time somebody goes ...hmmm, it becomes another paltalk bullet point as proof of an indisputable naked short.
Let me ask you this, hndtohnd, when you saw the foia response that Frizzell received regarding cmkx ftd's, did it make you go ...hmmmm? Has the foia response, and it's undeniable ramifications, ever been discussed in paltalk? Have you ever tried to correct anyone who posted that the Jeffries letter was about naked shorts?
Barry, you probably don't realize this, but you are a part of the problem. Don't get me wrong, I think you're being truthful, but the next time something makes you go ...hmmmm, why don't you get to the bottom of it first, instead of going to the message boards and fanning the flames with a bunch of meaningless innuendo.
Now WHY would a brokerage house be looking for the Task Force now? And WHY wouldn't they know about the cert pull? And WHY would he lie to cover his true identity and claim to be an individual shareholder? And WHY would he be asking if the company were dead or had any assets out there?
Regardless of what you think, knowledge of cmkx is not required to obtain a brokers license. There could be many legitimate reasons for a broker to inquire about cmkx.
But thanks to you, the paltalkers have another bullet point on their list of half-truths and misstatements.
tsx exchange of growth = Toronto stock exchange
roi, here is a link to the english version -
http://www.100megs4.com/~dimmax/client/ucan/english/
Start at "page-01".
roi, flow through shares are specifically related to a Canadian tax benefit that allows investors the ability to take a very favorable tax deduction for their investment in a TSX company.
I believe the term "flow through" refers to the ability of the company's expenditures to flow through to the tax returns of their investors.
I'm not a Canadian tax expert but I think that's the gist of it.
Yes, but many know him by his other name - J. Michel De Montigny.
I'm not an expert, but based on my reading, the intent of this report was to assess the feasibility of doing an expensive exploration program and where to conduct the exploration. The results of which, would provide enough detail to reasonably value the reserves.
Why would anybody call the geologist? He's an accredited professional and issued a compliant report. Enough said.
8K filed today by MRES detailing an NI43-101 compliant report on a claims jointly owned by MRES and HRRN. No pr was issued by either company, no 8K was filed by HRRN. Very strange goings on by these wacky Canadians.
guy42i, the answer to your question falls under IRC section 382. Any pre-change NOL carryovers would be subject to limitation if there is more than a 50% change in the control group within a 3 year period. (I'm generalizing and going from memory about the specifics.)
We should be hearing from MRES within the next three weeks, with a notification of late filing of form 10-K.
Why all the drama, the TSX company is UCAN Mining Group.
http://www.investorshub.com/boards/read_msg.asp?message_id=20266421
Lexit, nice work. Why is it that DeMontigney refused to identify UCAN in today's PR? Could it be because UCAN was the fourth symbol listed on the Trimax Project portfolio page along with UMNG, HRRN, and MRES? (Notice Trimax has removed any mention of these four, along with New Trends from their website.)
I could be wrong, but it appears to this casual observer that there is a bit of ... ahem ... overlap going on with a number of the claims. Why three different mining companies controlled by the same guys? One of the three claims to be in the process of uplisting (UMNG), while another of the three s (MRES) is already uplisted and recently purchased mining claims in the same area, probably from the same seller (Exploration Miniere Grenville, Inc.), who appears to be related to the last of the three (HRRN) based on the owner's name - Reynault.
PS. If this post seems confusing and a bit circuitous, don't blame me, that's just how the crumbs are falling from J. Michel's beard.
I agree dog, SLJB was pretty obvious. But nowhere near as obvious as CSHD, oh man, can you believe anybody actually bought into that one? Of course with the exception of the amoral mouth breathers that were out to steal other peoples money by trying to play a run on that scam.