"2nd Part of Supatcha story in the Vancouver Sun today."

And here's the link:

http://www.vancouversun.com/technology/promoter+pops+sketchy+bulletin+board+company/4067989/story.html

From today's news item: six months slippage

or "tomorrow never comes"

“The improvement in our balance sheet is another indication of the positive SECULAR [my emphasis] turn in fundamental dynamics that have been achieved over the past 12 months."

Can anyone explain to me what on earth "secular" is intended to mean in this context?

I suspect Zucchini is getting confused.

Mind you when you're busy making things up to impress your shareholders, as is Dr. Zucchini, I don't suppose you can keep a grasp on the English language too.

BTW, doesn't this represent (at least) six months' slippage?

“The funding also will support operations as we transition to revenue from sales of DAVANAT® in South America in the second half of 2011, pending regulatory approval there."

Just thought I'd ask. Actually it's a rhetorical question:

"Regulatory approval to market and sell DAVANAT® is expected in the first quarter of 2011."

http://www.news-medical.net/news/2010102...

Funny how they slipped that bit of bad news in so unobtrusively.

Don't let the door hit you in the a** on the way out

"Horizon Health International Corp. Announces Resignation of the Chairman of the Board


HORIZON HEALTH INTERNATIONAL CORP. (PINK SHEETS: HZHID) (the Company) announced today that the Company's Chairman of the Board, Dr. Max Arella of Montreal QC tendered his resignation on December 31, 2010.

Dr. Arella stated: "My resignation is due to the various previous commitments I have in other companies and also in teaching activities that I am planning during the next few months. However, I will always be available to help you in the scientific and business discussions with our partner in Japan. I have enjoyed very much our collaboration and I am looking forward to serve the company when you may need my advice."

Mr. Rocco Di Fruscia, the Company's CEO, stated, "I regret, but understand the decision by Dr. Arella. We thank Dr. Arella and look forward to work with him in an advisory capacity when required from time to time.""

So that just leaves slum landlord and convicted bootlegger Rocco at the helm.

Just as well he'll be able to call on the services of fellow scamster Maxie "Baby" Arella when the need arises.

As the years go on, Maxie Baby will know more about penny stock scams run out of Canada than many, and therefore in a great position to offer that advice Rocco wants.

Here's another question:

Given that A5 Laboratories' stated vision is to:

"Establish a Biotechnology company by developing novel immune therapeutic applications of natural gamma-interferon therapy to treat cancer and infectious diseases."

http://www.a5labs.com/

why then does the "Interferon" section of their website focus on the applications of alpha interferon which is quite a different cytokine altogether?

For example, all this is true, but utterly irrelevant to gamma interferon:

"Interferon-alpha has many effects on the cells in the body. When a virus has infected cells in a tissue or organ, interferon protects neighboring uninfected cells and halts the spread of the virus. Interferon therapy stimulates the release of enzymes that interfere with protein synthesis and thereby destroys virus-infected cells. Generally, interferon-alpha is one choice of treatment for patients infected with hepatitis C. It can be used in combination with other medications, such as the antiviral drug ribavirin, to improve the response to hepatitis C.

Another effect of IFN-alpha is to boost the immune system to fight off the spread of cancer in the body. Different cell types in the body, namely natural killer cells (NK cells) or macrophages, are activated by interferon and can then attack and destroy cancer cells. Interferon also increases expression of proteins on the surface of tumor cells, thereby making them more visible for attack by cells of the immune system.

Interferon therapy is used to treat patients suffering from malignant melanoma that has spread to lymph nodes. It has been shown to reduce the rate of recurrence in patients with melanoma. Interferon can also be used to treat other cancers, mainly leukemia and lymphoma."

http://www.a5labs.com/technology/interferon/

Of course, it could give the naive investor the false impression that there's a much bigger market for gamma interferon than there actually is:

"Interferon gamma 1b is used to treat chronic granulomatous disease[11] and osteopetrosis.[12] It is manufactured by InterMune as Actimune and costs around USD300 per vial."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Interferon-gamma

"a clinical trial of Actimmune [interferon gamma-1b] for the treatment of IPF ...... in fact failed"

http://www.thepharmaletter.com/file/69657/former-biotech-ceo-harkonen-convicted-of-wire-fraud.html


But a Canadian biotech that has insiders associated with known biopharmaceutical scams would never pull such as stunt, surely?

Just kidding - yes, they would, of course.

While I'm in a curious frame of mind about AFLB, I wonder if anyone could throw any light on to whom exactly, in their October 26, 2010, Press Release, AFLB claimed their new partner was?

This is the language I find intriguing:

"[AFLB] today announced the signing of a binding agreement with a European-based Institute of Microbiology"

http://finance.yahoo.com/news/A5-Laboratories-Inc-Signs-iw-2468100550.html?x=0&.v=1

Why just "a" European-based institute?

Which particular institute, is the obvious question?

And which country is it based in? Germany? UK? Bulgaria? Romania? Greece? Lichtenstein? Monaco? Serbia?

Such vagueness makes it very difficult to establish the veracity of the claims made by AFLB's management, and when looking at the public statements of any Canadian biotech with a strange business model, let alone one associated with known scamsters such as Max Arella (which AFLB is) then verification is very important.

An equally valid question is why such an arrangement with a Microbiology Institute is necessary at all?

"The Institute has agreed to manufacture natural source interferon products using A5 Labs' proprietary production technology."

Why wouldn't they go to a contract manufacturing organisation like any reputable company would - there are several who can do biosimilar cytokines and other proteins.

And here's another interesting thing:

No matter what terms you use, the alleged patent announced in this PR:

http://finance.yahoo.com/news/A5-Laboratories-Inc-Granted-iw-61971249.html?x=0&.v=1

cannot be found (by me, at least) by any search I can think of on the US patent site, for example using terms which inevitably would be in any such patent:

http://patft.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-Parser?Sect1=PTO2&Sect2=HITOFF&u=%2Fnetahtml%2FPTO%2Fsearch-adv.htm&r=0&p=1&f=S&l=50&Query=pn%2F61%2F400%2C719+&d=PTXT

http://patft.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-Parser?Sect1=PTO2&Sect2=HITOFF&p=1&u=%2Fnetahtml%2FPTO%2Fsearch-bool.html&r=0&f=S&l=50&TERM1=VI-1718&FIELD1=&co1=AND&TERM2=&FIELD2=&d=PTXT

which is odd.

I was trying to find out whether AFLB's alleged protein production method was based on recombinant, HLA or other technology. The record seems to be silent on this.

Which is also odd.

AFLB looks extremely dodgy to me, I must say.

"Ridicule his message all you like."

I fully intend to. It's entirely worthy of ridicule.

"But what happens if you get served, and all the legal documents turn out to be written in Arabic?"

Then I suspect that he will have to get them translated for them to have any effect in a US court.

Or indeed in a Canadian court, for that is where his libellous allegations were fabricated.

Incidentally here's another examples of a similar letter with similar language sent on behalf of some other scamsters just like Arella/Spencer Pharma:

http://viewer.zoho.com/docs/ybfccH

My response if I ever get served by Arella's attorneys will be very similar, except I will immediately issue a countersuit.

As I've said before, I look forward to the Discovery process with something akin to glee.

I wonder if that Discovery process will throw up any "surprises"? I'm sure you can guess the kind of thing I mean.

"why do such a thing unanimously if there isn't some inside knowledge which justifies it?"

It's not the first time he's arranged for his cronies on the BoD to give him a large bonus; he did the same in 2007, although to be fair it was only $50,000:

"In 2007, the Company awarded Dr. Barnhill a bonus in the gross amount of $50,000 in recognition of his extraordinary efforts on behalf of the Company."
http://www.wikinvest.com/stock/Health_Discovery_(HDVY)/Filing/10-K/2009/F3916497

I can't think then what inside information would have justified that.

Or the previous decision to give Dr. Barnhill 10% of any revenues straight off the top, a most irregular and unusual compensation arrangement, which might almost, perhaps, (maybe in a parallel unoverse) be justified if he had in any way performed good things for his long-suffering shareholders.

But he hasn't, has he?

Perhaps this time round he restricted himself to a mere $100,000 out of solidarity with long-suffering longs such as tryintomakamil.

Must be good to know the CEO of the object of your affections feels your pain.

"I FIGURED THEY ALL BE SOMEWHERE IN SOUTH AMERICAN ENJOYING THE GOOD LIFE BY NOW. ON OUR $$$$ OF COURSE."

What makes you think they're not in Latin America "enjoying the good life"? Whoever "they" might be, although I think we're getting closer to finding out.

One of the joys of the wired world is that you can conduct scams like Supatcha from anywhere on the globe. Like Panama or Thailand, for example.

PS: Moderator, please do not put the latest scienter from Supatcha, the email full of false claims, on the "stickies" or in the iBox. It would only encourage those who should know better than to promote false hope among the more credulous members of the investment community.

"that convent is strict :)"

Not as strict as this one:

http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=58431139

"Not being a businessman I don't know whether that is normal when involved in a JV. If I were CEO I would like to be CC on important emails regarding my baby. I'm probably just being naive."

If you were CEO of a major multinational with tens of thousands of employees, then it would certainly be unrealistic to expect you to be on top of JV partners in far-flung parts of the world.

On the other hand, if you were CEO of a company with, say, two full time employees, and were expecting a considerable percentage of revenues to result from a particular JV, then if you didn't have intimate knowledge of the day-to-day progress of that JV, then I would suggest that you were incompetent to the point of dereliction of duty, and indeed in breach of your fiduciary duty to your shareholders.

"NOT SO GREAT OF A START OF 2011!!!

Why soooooo quite[sic]??????????"

I suspect that it may be because Spencer Pharma, clearly being a fraudulent enterprise, may well be under investigation by the relevant authorities(and if it's not, then it should be).

If so, then the best policy for Arella and his co-conspirators would certainly be to lay low and hope the attention goes away. These guys have other vehicles they can use for the good ol' pump 'n dumperooni in the meantime, and no doubt the posters who feel inclined to support them are currently focusing on those other oppportunities.

Let's see how long it lasts.

PS Maxie, please could you "GOVERN YOURSELF ACCORDINGLY" and provide me with the "coordinates" of your attorney? I'm thinking your email was in itself libelous, and if you won't make the first move, then maybe I will. TIA.

"The company said to its stock holders wait do nothing until you hear from us and that is what I am doing."

When did they say anything like that to their stock holders?

I must have missed that - I thought once the SEC came calling the crooks running the Supatcha scam folded their tents and sloped off like thieves in the night, (to mix a couple of literary allusions), without saying a word to their shareholders.

Unless, of course, some of those posting urging others to "wait do nothing until you hear from [Supatcha]" are SAEI representatives, which I guess is possible.

But if so, shouldn't they declare that?

"Your opinion only, but there it is in black and white."

No, it isn't. The copy of Supatcha's fraudulent PR that used to be found at the link you gave now reads:

" Error

An error has occurred on our Web site.
We're sorry, the web page you requested is temporarily unavailable. Click here return to your home page.

If the problem persists please contact TD AMERITRADE by phone at 800-669-3900 or by e-mail at clientservices@tdameritrade.com for further assistance."

That would be because even TDA has woken up to the clear facts that prove SAEI is a fraudulent enterprise run by crooks.

For anyone to maintain otherwise shows severe lack of critical judgment or severe lack of a moral compass. The posting history usually can tell you which is the case, and this is no exception.

The so-called "financial report" is a strange mixture of New Age nonsense masquerading as science, and a set of "accounts" that are not only difficult to read: on one page they compare YTD 2009 to YTD 2009 - i.e. the same period but have different numbers.

While this appears to be a simple misprint showing that no care or attention was taken when this report was compiled - one of the "2009"s should be 2010, presumably - we've seen this type of thing before with, for example, Green Energy Resources, a Grey Market pinky that somehow "misstated" its OTC filings.

IFUS's accounts also yield interesting results when Benford's Law is applied:

http://www.kirix.com/blog/2008/07/22/fun-and-fraud-detection-with-benfords-law/

The scariest thing, though, is the statement that they intend to raise $1 million during 2011. While those of us who've seen a few of these scams know where that money will end up (hint: it won't be invested in the business), there seem to be a few IFUS true believers who will let them get away with this.

"I suggest you stop speculating because you are wrong about some of the things you're writing"

It's in the hands of LLEG's CEO to stop the speculation instead of adding to it as you have just done by saying some speculation is wrong, and by hinting at great things to come without being specific.

Simply announce to your fellow shareholders all the details of the Burgess BioPower deal, and all the details of the new projects that you can confirm.

Hey Presto! No more need for speculation, good or bad.

If you really did sign such a bad CDA with your BBP partners that it would stop you discharging your duty to inform the (other) owners of LLEG, you (or your lawyers) will have to explain that your fiduciary duty to your (fellow) shareholders overrides whatever narrow personal or commercial interest it is that the CDA is designed to protect.

At the very least you should announce a firm and reasonable timetable for that information to become public.

Otherwise LLEG shareholders, and potential LLEG shareholders will think LLEG's CEO has something to hide. And I suspect they will be right.

"Longs don't worry. SAEI website explains exacitly what is happening"

No, it doesn't. What passes for SAEI's website is a complete fabrication, falsely accusing various well-respected iHub posters of various (somewhat improbable) crimes, all in an effort to distract attention from the real fact of the matter:

Supatcha Resources was a relatively large scale pump and dump operation, fuelled by fictitious filings, bogus buyouts and forgery and fraud on a large scale, staffed by non-existent managers using "borrowed" resumés and hiding behind an (anonymous) IR company.

The sad thing is that such fraud is relatively common on the Pink Sheets. The factors that make SAEI interesting are the scale of the attempted fraud, the lack of care that the parties behind this fraud took to cover their tracks, and the phenomenon of shared and constructive due diligence that enabled the scam to be uncovered at a reasonably early stage.

The other thing that is interesting is that even when it is known that SEC are investigating those behind this obvious criminal conspiracy, there are those who are willing to defend them, and in some case who are willing to defend them using untruths.

When other TLA agencies become involved in the SAEI clean up, I do hope they will look at those parties posting fiction and excuses carefully.

"April 2007 - The future looked so bright. Did anyone think that 3.5 years later we'd still have no products, still be printing shares (diluting shareholders) for cash, and trading under 20 cents per share? I didn't."

I did. And I said so. And I told you why I thought so.

And still I'm the negative basher, and those who said you'd all be rich by now are the good guys.

Go figure.

"If someone knows that big news is coming then they start bashing in order to drive the price down so they can load up before the news."

What actually happened here is that Spencer Pharma conspired with third parties to fabricate "big news" (the alleged buy-out by heretofore unknown third party described variously as Al-Dora, Al-Dorra and Al Durrah).

At the same time a Canadian hedge fund spent in excess of $250,000 paying penny stock promoters all over the Internet to reproduce Dr. Arella's lies about this phantom "buy-out".

This was intended to be a classic pump and dump of the type that Arella and his cronies have pulled a few times now. But they got their timing wrong because some folks were wise to what was about to happen before they could cash in big time.

Spencer Pharma will doubtless try another few pumps before they give up on this one, but the real criminals behind it are probably busy on their next schemes already.

"Is there anything that says businesses can't retool other news releases? I doubt it."

Yes. That would be the Securities laws, and various other pieces of legislation that actively discourage Directors and management telling lies when promoting their company. Funny thing, that.

It seems to be difficult for some people to understand that when "plagiarism" results in clear impossibilities and inconsistencies, this is definitive proof of fraud.

"They all sound the same to me, except the specific itmes that pertain to the company."

That's precisely the point. By copying a genuine company's PR, or report, and relying on the fact that few will do proper DD - or even relying on the fact that some will defend obvious fraud for reasons that while comprehensible are nevertheless indefensible - the crooks behind Supatcha thought they might get away with it.

In this case, thanks to the excellent work of folk like nodummy and Janice Shell, they were wrong.

"Why reinvent the wheel?"

In this particular case, to avoid being caught commiting grevious scienters and being prosecuted for the same.

"Next time your friend has a flare up of gout, tell him to toss the antibiotics and the pain killers, and take this as well as the IFUS Intact"

Don't forget the eye of newt, and there's no doubt that burying a dead cat at the crossroads at the very stroke of midnight will further improve the prognosis.

Sometimes I think the 20th Century never happened, let alone the past decade.

I suppose such pockets of resistance to the "new learning" like medicine and science are the reason why snake oil, ineffective remedies such as IFUS Intact (as well as instant get-poor-quick cures such as IFUS itself) can still find a market among the gullible and the ill-educated.

PS "His friend" would be well-employed getiing proper medical advice. There's no doubt that that proper medical advice would include a prescription for allopurinol long term, which won't help with the immediate acute flare, but will reduce their incidence or even abolish them completely. Now that's good, evidence-based advice.

"The T R U T H will be out soon enough!! It will be one of the three:
1. SAEI scammed
2. Bashers scammed and lied
3. All the above."

Occam's razor, logic and reason, and the pure weight of evidence all point to 1) above, and just 1).

See this very excellent post from oldberkeley:

http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=58260121

"Wish I would have read that Dec 15th............."

You could also have read this on December 15:


http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=57780749

or this on November 20:

http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=56941203

In those days the iBox used to tell the truth. Now it's been modified by the Assistant Moderators (who, it must be said, are not as ubiquitous on this MB as they were in those heady Pump n Dump days).

Maybe in a few weeks I can put it back to telling the truth. Any views on that?

An excellent article from PinkInvesting.com from a couple weeks back:


"By Peter Hristov
Dec 15, 2010 NaturalNano, Inc. (NNAN.OB) A Sub Penny Stock Bids Farewell To The Pink Sheets Quotes

Yesterday, NaturalNano, Inc. (PINK:NNAN) recorded an immense increase in its trading volume. The number of traded shares reached 21 million which is the highest volume in the stock history. In addition, NNAN stock price headed sharply upward and jumped by more than 50%. As far as short volume is concerned, its ratio to the total number of traded shares reached 37%.

The euphoria about NNAN was caused by a publication, which announced a major change for the company stock. Yesterday, NNAN issued a press release to promulgate the fact that its common stock had bid farewell to the pink sheets quotes and began trading on the OTC Bulletin Board. In this regard, the company's CEO commented that "We took this step to increase the Company's exposure to both investors and market makers and provide a high level of liquidity for both shareholders and institutions and bring an added credibility to our common stock".


NaturalNano, Inc. is an enterprise which develops and markets advanced nanocomposites. Additive technologies and processes are the main activities of the company.

Unlike the recent announcement, the company financial reports seem to be incapable of causing any exaltation at all. To start with, current liabilities exceed current assets by about $3.6 million, while he company's net worth is a negative $6.6 million.

Revenues have increased as compared with the same quarter of the previous year but so have done the company's expenses. Thus, NNAN has lost $250 thousand net during the quarter, which represents an increase of $30 thousand from the previous year.

In a few words, there is an obvious need that NNAN should find some other way to hype its stock, as its financial state can turn to be a tremendous counterpoint to the recent progress of NNAN stock."

http://www.pinkinvesting.com/article/view/NaturalNano-Inc.-NNAN.OB-A-Sub-Penny-Stock-Bids-Farewell-To-The-Pink-Sheets-Quotes

A prescient article from PinkInvesting.com, before all the latest nonsense (criminally fraudulent nonsense at that) about Al-Dora/Al-Dorra/Al Durrah etc. etc. was published:

"By Peter Hristov

Nov 15, 2010 Spencer Pharmaceutical Inc. (SPPH.PK) Finds The Formula For Boosting Stocks

On Thursday last week, Spencer Pharmaceutical Inc. (PINK:SPPH) scored a dumbfounding increase in its trading volume, which was accompanied by a solid price increase. That day, the number of shares which changed hands reached $6 million, which is beyond comparison with its average volume of 300 thousand. A 46.53% increase in SPPH stock price came along with the volume explosion.

Friday was a calmer day for the stock, though compared with the stock average indicators, it was still a spectacular trading session. During the day, SPPH stock reached a volume of 2.7 million and made a 46.34% jump in its value. Thus, at the end of the week, the stock reached a price of $0.6 per share.


Old folks used to say that where there is a smoke, there is a fire. Therefore, there is certainly a reason for the spectacular performance of the stock.

First of all, SPPH has been going through a massive promotional campaign, since the beginning of the month. It also seems that the company and its cronies doesn't spare money for its stock promotions. One of the promoters, for example, admitted to have been compensated twenty thousand dollars by a third party for the advertisement of SPPH.

Second, the company has been incessantly publishing news about its activity. So, it seems that the combination between series of press releases and paid promotions is the company's formula for attracting investors' attention.

On the other side of the picture, however, there is the fact that SPPH has never filed anything with the SEC. There is also the fact that, based on the company's last available financial report, the wealth of SPPH comes down to $300 in cash and $100 thousand in patents. The outstanding debt of the company is $300 thousand. SPPH has also waved good-bye to almost $200 thousand in the form of general and administrative expenses.

Surprisingly, it turns out that the company can spend tens of thousands of dollars for its stock promotions but doesn't even have any cash at hand for research and development for their primary focus, i.e the development of “new patented formulations of existing drugs”."

http://www.pinkinvesting.com/article/view/Spencer-Pharmaceutical-Inc.-SPPH.PK-Finds-The-Formula-For-Boosting-Stocks

PS Dr. Arella - Maxie baby - I'm still waiting for the number for your attorneys! Please don't let me down on this one - my guys are itching to go to work on the Discovery process!

Bravo!

Lucidly, indeed brilliantly, expressed and tightly argued.

"Theres a poster on yahoo named sundowner who has bashed the company for years."

Ah, thanks. No, not me, so I'm still waiting for MBB's apology.

"A5 Laboratories Inc. Retains Barwicki Investor Relations"


I wonder if Barwicki can work the same magic as they have with Tesoro Enterprises, another highly dodgy Canadian penny stock?

http://ih.advfn.com/p.php?pid=squote&symbol=TSNP#2y

Color me eccentric, but rather than hiring someone to pimp the pps

-I suspect a phantom buy-out offer cannot be far away, a tactic they can borrow from closely associated scam company Spencer Pharmaceuticals-

I think perhaps AFLB would do better to simply explain how their business model can work when they are many years and many millions of dollars away from producing a product which will be a mere commodity if and when it ever makes it to market.

In the post to which I'm replying,the CEO of LLEG accuses me of:

"You (or at least someone with the very same pseudonym) have been bashing this company for years, first on one of those other message boards and now here."

This allegation from Laidlaw's CEO is simply untrue. I'd hardly heard of Laidlaw until this year, and only posted on any LLEG message board in recent months.

I must also say that I'm not sure that a CEO who:

1) demonstrates paranoia at that level and

2) makes false accusations on public message boards

is good for shareholders.

In fact, as that might just be an actionable statement, I'd like to ask LLEG's CEO to prove it or withdraw it. TIA.

The LLEG CEO goes on to say:


"Well, since I own 67 percent of the company last I checked I am ok with having information disseminated"

Now I understand (although it's the fact that the information has definitely not been disseminated, nor has a date been set for its deissemination that I find most interesting.)

Mr Big Shot CEO doesn't think he has any responsibility or accountability to the little people, right?

I have a strange feeling that this is all going to end in tears.


Not for the big swinging CEO around here, of course, just the poor minority shareholders.

The LLEG CEO may find that, inconvenient though they are, they are more important than he thinks.

"Yet another to add to the ignore list."

I do hope that first LLEG's CEO will respond to my demand to withdraw his libellous and false statement that I've "been bashing this company for years", please.

And then I do hope he makes sure he presses the right button. It's surprising how many people have intimate knowledge of my posts in spite of claiming to have me on Ignore, in some cases for years now.

"theres plenty of evidence for both imo, the truth will come out eventually, but all were doing on here is speculating until we know the truth why judge and argue."

I can't agree.

I've seen an overwhelming amount of documentation and reasoned arguments that highlight that Suptacha was a (somewhat amateurish) scam run by folk out of North America, with bases in other places, but almost certainly not including Ukraine or Russia. This has been well supported by links and copies of other source materials.

On the other side of the argument - the Supatcha is not a scam but a reputable outfit that was brought down by evil shorts/market makers/Russian mafia/the Illuminati* (*delete where applicable)- all I've seen is implausible reasoning that would involve such a string of unlikely coincidences that would have Occam reaching for his trusty razor immediately. Plagiarism in SEC filings and in public communications is indeed fraud, and no safe harbor statement would cover such deliberate lies.

And as for the argument that SAEI's management are innocent until proven guilty, I suggest that the work done by the nodummys, Janice Shells and other DD heroes is in and of itself, compelling proof that SAEI's mysterious management are indeed thieves and fraudsters.

It is not necessary for there to have been a court case for us to believe that Al Capone was a murderous gangster - even though he was only ever convicted of tax evasion - , or that Kenneth Lay was responsible for massive corruption and fraud at Enron - technically he was not guilty as he died before his appeals were exhausted.

Personally I think the attempt to paint Supatcha as the victim in this case goes beyond wishful thinking or any reasonable attempt at fairness and shades into complicity with the other criminals behind SAEI.

"The last time I checked the CEO reported to the Board of Directors."

And the last time I checked the BoD were responsible to the shareholders - you know, the owners of LLEG (and perhaps part owners of Burgess BioPower, perhaps not - Mike doesn't seem to keen to tell his bosses about that for some reason) and therefore the BoD's and the CEO's employers.

"You should know this most basic tenant of corporate governance."

I will freely confess that I didn't even know Corporate governance took rent from paying lodgers, aka tenants.

But I do know this most basic tenet of Corporate Governance:

"Corporate Governance defines corporate governance as the acceptance by management of the inalienable rights of shareholders as the true owners of the corporation and of their own role as trustees on behalf of the shareholders"


Surprising in that context, though, that Mike says hs owners have to wait for the SEC registration form before he will tell his employers what they own and don't own.

"I'm not going to debate our business dealings with you. You stated that your "hobby" is to expose fraudulent pink sheet stocks, so if that's the case there are probably literally hundreds upon which you can focus your attention. This is not one of them. The fact that you don't like the timing of our disclosure does not make what we are doing inappropriate in any way. You don't seem to be a shareholder, so not much more I can do for you."

Mike, if you don't mind me saying so, you seem a bit tetchy. Take a deep breath and calm down.

As you will know, you can't disclose anything to the investors in LLEG without disclosing it to the wider investing public, so I'm really not sure what the point of this statement is:

"You don't seem to be a shareholder, so not much more I can do for you."

"You stated that your "hobby" is to expose fraudulent pink sheet stocks, so if that's the case there are probably literally hundreds upon which you can focus your attention. This is not one of them."

That's not my only hobby, and some of the Pink Sheets stocks I look at aren't scams (although fewer than most people would imagine).

Again, if you don't mind me saying so, you come across as a little too defensive.

A word of advice: if you're going to post on a public message board for a public company of which you are CEO -an extremely unusual step in itself, some would say- then you should try to be more courteous, and hold it together in general.

After all, your employers expect high standards from their hired help.

"The fact that you don't like the timing of our disclosure does not make what we are doing inappropriate in any way."

You can say that, but I've rarely seen a company get so far advanced with a JV involving other third parties without their own shareholders having at least some vague idea of "what's in it for them".

It's most unusual, and I would hazard to say irregular too.

"I believe I've made it quite clear in prior posts that we are engaged in a transaction that involves the sale of that interest, the specific terms of which cannot be disclosed at this time. The specific details will be contained in the registration statement filed with the SEC"

You've certainly claimed that before, yes.

However I find it difficult to conceive of any responsible CEO making such a covert deal with third parties that he or she is not able to disclose to his or her employers (that would be LLEG shareholders, unless that's changed too, of course) even the broadest details of how they retain an interest in what you have always billed as one of the company's key assets.

To enter such a super duper top secret deal that you can't disclose it to that group is tantamount to a breach of your fiduciary duty in my view.

In any event, when can we expect to see the details of the registration document filed with SEC?

TIA

Mike, you must have missed my post of December 21 and the subsequent reminder.


Maybe when you've finished lavishing praise on Spencerforhire you could address my fairly simple question.

TIA:

"sunspotter Share Tuesday, December 21, 2010 6:30:03 AM
Re: mbartoszek post# 82884 Tweet Post # of 83050

Hey, Mike, as you're in a communicative mood, maybe you can clear something up for me.It's quite simple, really.

Please could you tell me what interest ordinary private retail investors retain in the Berlin Project, now that it's run and owned by "NewCo", which involves third parties?

In other words, in quantitative terms, what percentage of this enterprise do LLEG shareholders own, and could you perhaps attach a value to it?

Many thanks in advance."

http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=57988095

"AGAIN?-Wrong key?"

It surely looks like a bad case of "fat finger syndrome".

But down here in the nether regions of the grey market, I guess anything's possible:

"Green Energy Resources, Inc. GRGR
Grey Market / Common Stock Pink OTC Markets has discontinued the display of quotes on otcmarkets.com for this security because it has been labeled Caveat Emptor (Buyer Beware) and because adequate current information has not been made available by the issuer of the securities. It has been labeled Caveat Emptor for one of the following reasons:
Questionable Promotion — The security is being promoted to the public, but adequate current information about the issuer has not been made available to the public.
Spam — The security is the subject of spam promotion having the effect of encouraging trading of the issuer's securities.
Investigation of Fraud — There is a known investigation of fraudulent activity involving the company, its securities or insiders.
Suspension/Halt — A Regulatory Authority has halted or suspended trading for public interest concerns (i.e. not a news or earning halt).
Disruptive Corporate Actions — The security or issuer is the subject of corporate actions, such as reverse mergers or serial stocks splits and name changes, without adequate current information being publicly available.
Unsolicited Quotes — The security has only been quoted on an unsolicited basis since it entered the public markets and the issuer has not made adequate current information available to the public.
Other Public Interest Concern — There is, in Pink OTC Markets' view, a public interest concern.
Consequently, Pink OTC Markets has removed the quotes from this website until adequate current information is made available by the issuer pursuant to Pink OTC Markets Guidelines for Providing Adequate Current Information (PDF) and until Pink OTC Markets believes there is no longer a public interest concern. Investors are encouraged to use care and due diligence in their investment decisions. Please read our Investor Protection page for more information."

http://www.otcmarkets.com/stock/grgr/quote

"wrote this off as an expensive lesson"

But no one wanted to look at the facts about NNAN's "management", their background and associations with other scam companies, or indeed even the history of Natural Nano.

Instead you listened to people who were obviously not telling the truth, as anyone could have determined with ten minutes of proper due diligence.

What did you expect to happen?

"What the heck you already moderate and assist far more boards"

I was only asking. If I did something wrong, I'd like to know.

"Pardon my ignorance"

Ignorance is not a characteristic I've ever associated with any of your excellent posts I've ever read.

"are you tying Barre to organized crime?"

Heaven forfend! I'm merely pointing out that a stint spent with Hanson plc is not necessarily the blue chip experience some people assume it to be.

PS I'm not sure how I ended up as Assistant Moderator on this MB, having neither volunteered nor indeed informed of the possibility of this honor, but thank you to the previous Mod, anyway.

I note however, that the Mod position is vacant. As you started the posting here, are you not interested in assuming that lofty post?

"You have no proof who actually did the Geologist report. None, zero."

The good folks here have demonstrated beyond any reasonable doubt that the person that the crooks behind Supatcha claim wrote that report actually didn't. That is corroborated by Mr. Parham himself.

In fact the only possible conclusion is that there is no geologist's report, just a fraudulent document dressed up by the scamsters behind SAEI to look like a genuine report, although not fabricated very well, as should now be obvious to the meanest of intelligences.

There comes a stage where what appears initially to be wishful thinking on behalf of some posters shades into wilful misrepresentation, and that in itself should interest the SEC.

Merry Christmas to one and all!

"Must be the same lump of coal you were preaching when lleg was trading at .0005. Now almost 10x higher and its still a lump of coal?"

Not me, guv.

I've only arrived here recently, and besides preaching's not my style.

It's your money, and you must do what you want with it.

Me, I just enjoy studying penny stock scams and particularly seeing if there are any new ones to add to my collection.

Now what was that about Burgess BioPower again, and to whom it belongs, and in what proportions? I missed what you said in your reply, and I think we should be told.

Merry Christmas.

Burgess BioPower - who or what is it?

And who owns it?

A lump of coal for Christmas for LLEG longs or the real deal?

Maybe Mike B can come back to the Message Board and tell us.