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.
I was thinking more of the brokers committing fraud.
Have you forgotten that you received a summons and complaint?
No they haven't, but then again the genuine investors have not forgotten that their brokers took their money for shares they did not own and could not deliver.
You can't sue people for what somebody else did
Actually you can. Vicarious liability enables courts to convict employers for the illegal conduct of their employees even though the employers had no knowledge and so were not at fault.
Cease and Desists have been sent to the Ms Erickson of SEC.
I was always under the impression the SEC were supposed to stop the passing of false and misleading info, not do it.
Mr Greene has a big problem. It is acceptable to make an error and to be pass incorrect information in ignorance, but he and his department were advised by us and BCIT in January of their mistakes and yet they continue to perpetuate them.
Last week a member of SEC Colorado was served a cease and desist letter for continuing to pass false and misleading information to investors.
The SEC mission statement says
The mission of the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission is to protect investors, maintain fair, orderly, and efficient markets, and facilitate capital formation
And
Crucial to the SEC's effectiveness in each of these areas is its enforcement authority. Each year the SEC brings hundreds of civil enforcement actions against individuals and companies for violation of the securities laws. Typical infractions include insider trading, accounting fraud, and providing false or misleading information about securities and the companies that issue them.
The relationship among the three is really far more complex than that.
Janice that is the nub of the problem. The relationship is too complex they have no idea which way is up.
Dont guess.
Worthless stock can go to specialist companies and or moved into accounts marked worthless stock.
Granted, some of the brokers are OBOs,
You have to remember that the 36 million shortfall is for people a lot of who are on this board and who are talking to us on a daily basis. They are not OBOs and certainly not dead.
Indeed that appears to be true.
You have to bear in mind that FINRA takes its lead from SEC.
SEC takes its lead from the DTCC.
We know about the dead etc, but the fact is that the shares would not vanish, bearing in mind the lock which allegedly prevents transfer and delivery blah blah blah.
It makes you wonder why SEC, FINRA and DTC suggested it.
The amounts shown in individual shareholders' account statements should add up to each brokerage's total for the stock in question.
Agreed, but the brokerages figures are different from previous lists and in some cases from their own internal audit.
I cannot talk about individual investors.
ADP--wasn't happy about the use to which their service had been put.
How sad, ADP got paid and banked the money.
The point is that are 1200 investors who are not happy to their money being taken for shares that the brokers did not own.
More like too little too late.
There have been a steady trickle of people emerging from the woodwork over the last few weeks.
If they want to take part and let us help them then fine. If they don't, then so be it.
Work it out for yourself, you seem to have all the answers.
If you read the PR you would know what was in the letter.
What do you call someone in street name, is not on the OBO, and not on the NOBO
Victim of Crime.
Megas sued 1200 people, and he did it on the basis of a NOBO list
Big Deal Janice.
Please explain how in Gods name does that follow on from Mastas comment which says "Imagine if a broker took money from a client, and never bought any shares of any kind...just took the money, because they knew...or thought they knew, that BCIT was doomed, and they would never have to give the money back, or supply a cert. Such a person would be a NONNOBO. There are some...quite a few actually. Serious business."
Investors should either be on the NOBO list or the OBO list. Yet we know that there are are people who are not objecting who are not on the NOBO.
We also know people whose share count for investors on the NOBO is well below the number bought. In fact just from the people we know of the NOBO list is over 36 million light.
We know as fact that TDA are shown on the NOBO as having 89 million when in fact their position is over 117 million.
Certainly the purpose of NOBO lists was violated.
By the brokers
If brokers blocked the ability to serve S/H's by hiding sold positions.
Watch this space
Everyone who bought and still holds a position in BCIT should be on or other of the lists held by Broadridge
But they aren't.
Same list you used to sue us, right?
WRONG for several reasons.
1. We never sued anyone :0
2. The current Broadridge list is not the same as previous ones.
Everyone who bought and still holds a position in BCIT should be on or other of the lists held by Broadridge.
We know from the people who have already supplied us their details that this is not the case.
OK agreed.
I believe that something will be going out in the next few weeks.
Who got the money - the BROKERS or the MARKET MAKERS?
Who else could it have gone to?
Until more PR's are released nobody know the value of BCIT.
It is not PRs that determine value.
I only began posting here--at Art2Gecko's request--the day before the SEC suspended in 2005.
The secret to all great comedy is timing.
Darbiie still hold approx 25 million restricted shares which were issued late 2005. These were supposed top have been returned to the TA when the unrestricted shares were ratified by the Ok court.
I am unable to comment further on this matter.
By the terms of the settlement agreement between BCIT and Darbie et al., 245 million shares were issued by BCIT for cash, and should have been sent to CEDE. Evidently they were not.
Yeah Janice has got it.
The responsibility to send them to cede & Co rests with Darbie and Co NOT the company.
The issuer has very limited participation with DTCC, in fact hardly any.
The TA is a limited participant so if either of those two sent the shares to DTCC they would be sent straight back.
The shares can only be deposited by the participant (Broker or shareholder)
Not a BCIT problem end of story
The certs were cut with the brokerages' names on them. They were not accompanied by instructions to deposit them to any client's account.
Just like the certs in the name of Cede & Co
Maybe they've already sent those certs back
Who cares, the fact is that they were issued and took delivery of them.
Try telling a court that the cusip is 106 or that there are no paper certs or that Bancorp no longer exists.
In 2005, there were 645K genuine shares on deposit at DTCC
That is correct and at that time there was total float of 1 million shares give or take.
In September 2005 a senior compliance manager for one of the USA biggest brokers wrote to a concerned BCIT Investor and said there was no naked short despite the fact that the Brokerage he works for still needs to cover 117 million shares.
Last i read the dtcc still doesn't acknowledge bcit has a ta
Dont read much do you, if you did you would know that things have changed on that front.
Friday.
It is worth waiting for.
There are additional court cases pending. As I may have said these were moved out of small claims by the brokers when they lawyered up.
Awaiting dates of hearings.
Has DTCC on deposit the 200+ million shares from the OK. City case?
They should have
The complaints against the SEC have nothing to do with getting shares from the brokers and money you silly little root veg.