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.
Right. Like they would have taken Urban in by now if they had anything on him, too.
The SEC is not done with Overstock.com yet. And there are a number of things that the SEC probably won't pursue against Skippy, like his outright lying about Overstock.com's working capital situation in January 2006, his comparing non-GAAP 20071Q financials to GAAP-compliant 20081Q financials, or previous claims he's made about Overstock.com being cash flow positive in past periods when, in fact, they were not.
However, when these activities come to light during discovery in this lawsuit, Gradient/Rocker are going to be seen as the parties who were right all along.
You doubt he's going to be subject to discovery?
Then you don't get how civil suits proceed. He absolutely will be subject to questioning. And you can also be certain he's not going to want to face a number of the questions coming his way.
As for the case against Gradient/Rocker, it all hinges on their research material and reports being false. As it turns out, Gradient Analytics has been pretty accurate with their predictions about Overstock.com.
There are actually two lawsuits filed by Overstock.com. The one that's generating the most noise is the one that was filed against Gradient Analytics and Rocker Partners.
Unfortunately for Skippy, discovery is a two-way street. And once Gradient/Rocker get Skippy in discovery, the world might learn a thing or two about the real crook in this case.
I'm sure it will be a great time. Although I wonder how Skippy will handle the questions about his repeated lies to the investment community about Overstock.com's performance and his own holdings in High Plains Investments, LLC.
It'd be a hoot if old Skippy pleads the Fifth on all of them.
I don't think Weiss worries too much about Skippy Byrne. I just think he's outraged by the (mis)behavior of Overstock.com's management.
Because it would have been an unlawful conveyance of corporate assets.
It's almost as if Entourage set up the deal in a way where CMKM Diamonds had to break it.
The same reason people watch Married... with Children re-runs. Even though you know how an episode is going to end, they're still good for a laugh.
I do hope you get to see some justice.
And, it's not that I like seeing people hurt or losing money, but just as much if not more that I dislike seeing people mislead or deluded. There is simply no way the individual investors are going to recover a cent from the CMKM Diamonds scam.
Mookie Faulk has a long track record as a grift-enabler.
Well, yeah. That is the rub. Then again, these goons have been brainwashed to believe a lot of things about naked short selling that simply aren't true.
There was a time, a LONG time ago, where we would tuck the occasional naked short position or two into an ex-clearing transaction. But it's really not worth the hassle because sooner or later you're going to have some petty little P&S clerk who'll make a stink over the position, take it to a supervisor, and then they'll try to close it out against you... obviously at a very disadvantageous price.
So, yeah, it is technically possible to naked short sell via ex-clearing transactions, but no one actually does it any more.
Ever had any encounters with institutions that specialize in non-recourse stock loans?
Reg SHO is not a law. It is a regulation, it is binding upon registered broker/dealers and their customers, but it does not apply to investors or other market participants who perform their trades outside of the traditional securities marketplace.
"NSDM-forever" actually touched upon the mechanism by which naked short sellers go about doing their business:
http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.asp?message_id=10808391
When he asked:
"Why do they need to have a formal exchange to trade shares?"
And the answer is: you don't. There is no law which stipulates that you must buy or sell or short sell stocks that interest you to or from a registered broker/dealer. There are a number of regulatory hurdles that you must overcome in order to privately execute a trade, including a trade where one party ends up with a naked short position, in a publicly registered security, but there are no prohibitions against it.
Perhaps you can cite the law that prohibits naked short selling.
(You can't. Because there is none.)
It is very difficult, and not at all cost effective, for the small investor to naked short stocks in the US, Forrest. But that doesn't mean that it's impossible. For multiple reasons, it's beyond the reach of the gulliblers who get caught up in these kinds of scams. When a GeneMax or a CMKM Diamonds pump'n'dump scam gets orchestrated, the promoters know that they're going to be taking down gulliblers a couple thousand dollars at a time. Naked short selling with such a small amount of capital makes no sense.
However, if you can put together a decent pool of half a million dollars or so, it is a strategy that becomes feasible. You don't have to be super wealthy, and you don't have to bribe anyone. And, yes, I have naked short sold securities in the past and continue to do so.
So, once again, Forrest, had I been able to line up a position against CMKM Diamonds, a position that obviously would have been completely profitable, what would YOU or anyone else do about it?
Of course I didn't, Forrest.
But I've naked short sold plenty of other securities in the past.
And you seem to have it in that exceedingly thick gourd of yours that there are negative consequences for anyone who happens to naked short a stock that goes to zero.
Well here's a great example, Forrest, albeit a theoretical one. Suppose I had succeeded at naked short selling a billion shares of CMKM Diamonds. I did give it a half-hearted try, but knew it was a waste and had plenty of other opportunities to pursue.
What difference would my success at naked shorting CMKM Diamonds have made, besides the 100% gain on the position of course?
Sure, Forrest. Let's talk about CMKM Diamonds.
I managed to naked short sell a billion shares prior to the revocation.
So what? What will you, or anyone else for that matter, do about it?
If you could read financials, Forrest, then why didn't you realize GeneMax was being wrecked from within? Why is it you STILL don't understand that it was nothing more than a pump'n'dump scam?
Yes, Forrest, the GeneMax scam is effectively over, even though the wreckage lives on as a 20-cent sucker play for anyone else like you who can't read financials.
And anyone who shorted GeneMax, even if they naked shorted the shares, made the right call.
So you say, Forrest, so you say.
So how much capital has GeneMax/TapImmune raised during its lifetime?
How much is left?
Where'd it all go?
Who was ICI?
I know the answers to those questions, Forrest. It's how I know that GeneMax was never anything but a massive pump'n'dump racket.
And back to pennies again.
Yes, the GeneMax scam was one of the more spectacular pump'n'dump rackets our markets have seen.
I know quite a bit about GeneMax, Forrest.
And it was not a "short squeeze". It was a pump'n'dump of massive proportions. There is no better evidence to show what a pump'n'dump GeneMax was than their current market price: ~20 cents. Sooner or later, all pump'n'dump rackets collapse.
And that's how pump'n'dumps work, Forrest. Managements and promoters hype a stock with news releases that are, at best, questionable, and in many cases downright fraudulent. The GeneMax "breathtaking gene therapy", highly touted in communications from their sleazy stock promoter ICI in 2001, has never amounted to anything. (Prior to the pump in the Fall of 2001, GeneMax had issued over 15 million shares to those stock touts.)
One need look no further than the 10-K's to see what management at GeneMax was doing. For 2002, after the 2001 pump, GeneMax would spend just over $800k on R&D. Yet they would spend $1.3 million on management fees, "consulting", and other SGA items.
That you would continue to misread GeneMax as anything other than a garden variety pump'n'dump racket marks you indelibly as a dolt of Saunderesque proportions.
He is a dolt. And by whom is he "well respected"?
Other dolts.
For Casavant's sakes, this idiot just brought up GeneMax of all scams! Here is a clear-cut case of a pump'n'dump scam that thoroughly scorched gullible investors, yet he talks about "catching shorty".
He's been wrong all along about CMKM Diamonds and wrong about any "naked short selling" that may have taken place here. And finally, he couldn't be more wrong about any penalties that may await anyone who might have naked shorted CMKM Diamonds.
That kind of track record does not deserve respect; he's earned nothing but scorn and ridicule.
Because there are investors who have been conditioned by a number of crooked and/or stupid stock promoters to believe that naked short selling is a cause rather than an effect. These investors have been lead to believe that, by buying into these decrepit companies, they're somehow helping the "good" guys fight the "evil" naked short sellers.
Have you ever pulled an e-mail from a Nigerian 419er out of your spam catcher? Those criminals will use every angle... God, religion, patriotism, anything that they think will appeal to people's hearts instead of their heads... to chisel money out of their targets.
It's no different with the rats who use the "naked short seller" story as a diversion to rip off investors.
You've been out of ammo for a LONG time, Forrest.
That you would even bring GeneMax (n/k/a TapImmune) into this conversation demonstrates beyond a shadow of a doubt how thoroughly clueless you are. That putrid "development stage" company has squandered every penny of capital they ever raised from investors. And while they've lavished their management with exceptional professional and management fee contracts, what portion of their operating budget would you guess this zero-revenue, "development stage" company spent on research and development last year?
Less than 12%.
THAT is how pump'n'dump scams operate.
For the sake of an entertaining, gullibler-deluded discussion, let's just say I was successful at naked short selling a billion shares of CMKM Diamonds.
What would you or anyone else do about it?
No. Not even if you catch them. Naked short selling a worthless security is always a winning trade.
If ANY of them successfully naked short sold CMKM Diamonds, then they made the right call and they win.
Yeah, it's still going alright, Forrest.
http://charts.edgar-online.com/ext/charts.dll?2-6-11-0-0-5120-03NA000000TPIM-&SF:1|5-FL:1=0A246A-HO:SW-BT=11-HT=395-WD=777
Are you STILL going to tell us that's not a classic pump'n'dump scam?
And GeneMax was a hideous pump'n'dump scam. If you were a part of that racket, it's not exactly something you should brag about.
That bucket of hair was not needed to do any forensic accounting.
If Fizzle had been serious about putting all the pieces back together, he would have gathered up every single piece of paper held by the transfer agent.
Instead, he sent you rubes on a wasteful drive through the country-side.
And if you had a clue about how corporate ownership is determined, you would have asked for that years ago.
Listen? To a gullibler who STILL thinks shorty's going to get caught as part of the CMKM Diamonds scam?
I think not.
And where would you begin your count, Forrest?
No, not mean.
Just someone who's read far too many of Forrest's previous posts.
Sure you would have. You can't even find your ass with both hands. How would you have "cleaned this up"?
Oh dear... even Forrest is losing patience.
He's an Urban Casavant clone who pretty much did to Universal Express and her shareholders what Urban did to CMKM Diamonds and her shareholders.
How did sending all of the shareholders on an asinine, do-nothing cert-pull protect what the company can legally attach?
The first portion of your message is correct. The source for all the information anyone needs about CMKM Diamonds' ownership rests in those records.
I have not heard Fizzle or anyone else claim that there is a problem with the stock transfer ledgers. But if, as you seem to be suggesting, those records are in disarray, then the way for Fizzle to resolve this problem is to order all of the raw documentation from First Global and to rebuild the stock transfer ledgers himself.
But that's not what Fizzle did. Instead, he sent the shareholders on a wild goose chase which did nothing but waste time and money. As someone who should really know better, what Fizzle did was despicable.
I derive no satisfaction from seeing people lose their money on scams like this.
And I feel badly that so many people cling to the stupidity that got them into this situation in the first place.
If they had assets that they could have legally distributed to the shareholders, they could have done it at any time by relying upon the stock transfer ledger.
That's how ALL corporations determine how to distribute dividends and securities.