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.
You're right mrbogangles, we should all rely on pink sheet company pr's, how silly of me.
mrbojangles, what I've read on this board amounts to a retelling of Jack and the Beanstalk.
Cold, hard numbers, verified by a reputable third party (audited financials)is the beginning of due diligence. What's been put forward here as DD, really amounts to BB (blah blah). That's my opinion anyway, but since a good amount of the BB is coming from the mods, all dissenting opinions could soon be squashed.
Pablito, post number 5951:
Research the claims, check the historical reports by the gentleman now in the Canadian government, check for the 15 million dollar Canadian government placement in the company, check the financing through Trimax and Bear Sterns... if you can refute any of it, I'd like to know...you'll be saving me a ton of money. Til then.. leave well enough alone.
Sounds too good to be true, huh.
Pablito, howard posts a lot of jokes, when he said $50 - $100 I assumed he was joking again.
Do you know anything about this $15 million placement by the Canadian government that was mentioned earlier this morning? That would be great for GLXI, if true
Thank you Pablito, that is my point exactly. For the sake of argument, let's say the company acquired the Canadian mining company (which is where the claims came from) for $7 million worth of volatile pink sheet stock (this is straight from the company's website). The geological studies had previously been done by the former company. The key employees were retained by Umining.
Why am I considered the crazy basher because I find it hard to believe that the company acquired $98 MILLION OF PROVEN URANIUM RESERVES for less than 8 cents on the dollar worth of stock?
howard, you have no facts, that'w why you state in your disclaimer that it's all your opinion.
Who did they buy .....errrrrr give stock to when they acquired the claims? How many shares (trading under 30 cents) did it take? Do the math howard, it was no where close to $98 million.
howard, why do you need a disclaimer saying it's all your opinion when you state "Everything I stated is fact and is true to the letter."
You have no facts. Who did they acquire the claims from? How many shares of stock did they give away to acquire them? Certainly not $98,000,000 worth.
howard, you are too funny
proven uranium deposits of $98,000,000 haha, too funny
excavating now haha, too funny
Thanks Pedro, that explains everything!
liquidcool, I just saw your post. Didn't see it mentioned but the shares must be certed.
PS. I recognize that staircase, I was there Friday night for a charity event.
To the person that sent me a pm about glxi, sorry, but I don't have the ability to respond. All I can say is, good luck with that.
Speaking of claymation cartoons, did anyone catch Wayne Newton at halftime of the NBA All-Star game?
At 2:25 PM PST, RexZeitgiest said...
ahahahaahahaha....We can stop action it, so it's like a claymation cartoon.....
really dog, a $5 stock? I can't wait to see the details of your analysis. According to the company's website, they paid for the claims with shares - "The acquisitions were made possible by acquiring the assets of an existing Canadian Mining Company including its key staff, in return for a percentage of the Company's control position" Some amount less than 32 million obviously. They go on to claim - " The Company does not intend to increase the number of outstanding shares at the present time." But in a February 7th press release, they say - "Globex also announced that the Management team is currently evaluating several equity financing proposals from various finance organizations. Shareholders may rest assured that Globex will take into consideration the potential dilutive impact of any equity financing and weigh it against its ability to enhance the liquidity and financial position of the Company." Hmmm, equity financing, I wonder what other options they have to "weigh" it against.
But seriously, how many more PR's can they put out before they actually raise the money to commence drilling? I'm afraid we're about to find out.
At least they listen to their shareholders, one of which obviously alerted them to the public relations disaster that would have happened, if they had gone through with plans of changing their state of incorporation to Nevada. They seem to be kind of drifting along, strategy-wise.
I'm sure this post will be seen as a bash, but when someone posts that this is a $5 stock, it naturally piqued my interest. Have a nice weekend.
Please, allow me to rant for just a minute. I have no clue what posters on these boards refer to as "DD". But I know what it's not, and that's due diligence. From what I gather, most think that DD consists of going to the message boards for the latest rumors, placing a call to IR or the CEO for a nice objective opinion on how the company is doing, and possibly even mixing in a couple of googles.
Due diligence is a process, or even, layers of processes, that begin first and foremost, with the numbers. If there are no numbers, (or no verifiable numbers), then you could not possibly have done due diligence.
In this crazy land of the pinks, the less information, the better. Hopefully, facts are unable to be found or verified, because here in pinkyland, facts kill runs.
LOL, Isn't that the guy who came up with the theory that CMKX couldn't be revoked legally? Yes, he's top shelf, that one.
Did Rutherford pierce the corporate shell? If this lawsuit is the hold up on filing the interpleader, then Moran seems to be conceding that point.
trade15,
Could you give me the stock symbol on a few of those "latest promotions"?
TIA
tavycal, I love reading your posts.
Um sure, good luck with that.
I think I will call the IRS on tuesday and speak with someone knowledgeable
apologize for what? We called him a shameless tout, and he continues to prove it, every day. See where that stock is a week from now, after klon and his group have sold out and moved on to the the next group of unsuspecting suckers.
Congratulations hasher, you said the secret word.
Karma -
Karma is a sum of all that an individual has done, is currently doing and will do. The results or "fruits" of actions are called karma-phala. Karma is not about retribution, vengeance, punishment or reward, karma simply deals with what is. The effects of all deeds actively create past, present and future experiences, thus making one responsible for one's own life, and the pain and joy it brings to others.
.....and I wish you could have seen me flipping you off simultaneously with hitting the submit button on that one.
Good night!
You don't like scams? That explains why you sell them so fast. Well, you do have time to squeeze in a hundred or so posts fanning the momo flames, extolling the virtue of management, and doing your best to quell any signs of dissent. I know, you're just enthusiastically supporting your stock, like anyone of "righteous intent" naturally would. Then, as soon as you find out that all is not as rosy as you once believed, you do what any righteous individual would do, you drop them like a hot potato and focus on the next play.
We see you workin' Chuckie, that's why we care. ;)
69charger, a couple of years ago that post would have received a lot of attaboys, now it just makes you look...well...kinda pathetic.
Funny you should mention that -
Herb Greenberg (MarketWatch) submits: Overstock.com (OSTK) CEO Patrick Byrne is lucky because an investment firm he controls is his company's largest shareholder. If it weren't, and he were a mere employee (as are most CEOs), he would've been fired long ago for incompetence.
The fourth quarter, which should be any retailer's best, wasn't just bad; it was a disaster, with the worst losses of the year. (So much for an earlier theory he floated that suggested profits would grow as sales slowed.) Quarter after quarter Byrne confesses his sins, yet keeps his job, thanks largely (it would appear) to a board of friends instead of fiduciaries.
Who else would put up with such poor performance?
ummm no, I don't believe they did.
That sounds as if they did a Reg D private placement. Did they announce one?
seabiscuit, it's called low hanging fruit. Jim Plant gave them all the ammo they needed with those 12/31/06 financials he signed and had posted on pinksheets.com.
Shall I name a few hundred of the REPORTING companies that have never had one troy ounce of SEC concern to protect those shareholders ?
They have reasons.
Not the least of which are two numbers that show up on the 12/31/06 quickbooks financials -
$12 million Retained Earnings that effectively double their stated book value, and
$1 million Sales of Stock when they PR'd that they were buying back stock, not selling it.
Neither of these numbers were present in the 6/30/06 quickbooks financials.
yellowdog, you're going by what Jim Plant said?
Is this the same Jim Plant that signed the bogus financials that show a Retained Earnings number of $12 million popping up sometime between 6/30/06 and 12/31/06?
Is this the same Jim Plant that claimed the company was buying back shares when in fact at the same time they were selling over a $1 million worth?
I am going by what Jim Plant says. And trust me, he would have this info more readily than you or I or the pink sheets. Woof.
At least I know they have to keep a set of books. So that means I know more about it than Urbie, sheesh.
No one that sits on a message board is running a million dollar industry.
HotStocks1, can you take a little constructive criticism?
The 2006 AF's will only be for Q1 & Q2.
Now there's something you don't hear everyday.
Blotter Acid
Hey gump, do they make Prune flavored kool-aid?
Hey TED, not sure what Y2K is, but if it ever comes back I still have shares in a little company that offers a "highly automated solution for date conversion." ;)
requitedelight - to the contrary. What appears to be "priced in" at this moment, is that the market doesn't think the company will ever file AF's. Just an announcement of the auditor's engagement letter being signed off, could have a significant effect on the pps.
poor, poor gump. Swallowed the "get shorty" nonsense hook, line and sinker, yet, we are the naive ones.
Come on gump, that bs is so old. If proof exists, it is indisputable. Next you'll be telling us the proof will never be revealed to the public, for the good of the market.
They are certainly not going to show their hand prematurely just to show you or anyone else.
TavyCal, that's exactly my point, he/she did NOT purchase them.
Chunky but shoudnt he/she be able to pull the certs since he/she purchased them?
The shares were purchased by the IRA trustee with the cash that he/she contributed to his/her IRA account. I know it seems like a subtle difference, but in order to meet the requirements of tax law, it's extremely black and white. The laws concerning IRA's are written in a manner that tells you what you can't do, instead of what you can do.
I think Ameritrade has decided that, because of all of the uncertainty surrounding this issue, and the lack of precedent to guide it through, it's in everyone's best interest to keep the entire transaction, i.e. certification and dividend distribution, within the boundaries of the IRA trust.
Of course, some people have a vested interest in claiming that something nefarious is going on with the brokerages, when they could be just trying to cover their butts from the tax laws.