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.
Trading of the shares by traders and / or flippers only does so much for the pricing. A Company must have a definitive storyline (and some sort of results of the enterprise) in order to sustain interest in the Company thereby the Stock.
The Company has been completely silent publicly for over seven months. There have been rumours supplied, by some, over this time without any sustainable information being supplied by the Company. A Significant US holiday is upon us then comes the Christmas / New Year holiday market doldrums combined with Year End realities.
Maybe stock charts reflect certain future activities, maybe they don t, but a Public Company needs to have a Project and it needs to provide a storyline for Market interest to be generated. The Management of Sarissa either doesn t know this, doesn t care about the Company or there simply is a dead Company that people are trying to inflate.
IMO there is likely to be a slight rebound in the share pricing however it will no doubt simply be more of the minimalist up and downs of the past.
Based on the information publicly available at this time there is almost no chance of anything more meaningful that is going to occur.
I wish that wasn't the case however there is no practical Business or Financial reason to buy this Company s stock.
Where can I find the new Website that popped up?
No I don t however dealing with facts pertaining to Sarissa, or anything else, it doesn t take much time at all.
People have invested cash into the Business of Sarissa Resources and they deserve the Company to be operated in a responsible manner by responsible Directors and Officers / Management.
By all normal Business aspects that is not occurring with this Company and this Management Group.
When Dan Byrnes was installed as President / Director of Sarissa in September 2014 there was a general belief and hope among many that his involvement would bring about a positive change to the Company. Myself included however with reservations.
Much, if not all, of this hope was presumably based on the fact that for a number of years he provided regular commentary on the Company through this Board and provided what seemed at the time a sense / business plan of what needed to be done. He also indicated that he had invested in the Company not only in the trading Market but also through a Private Placement.
Since that time Shareholders have learned, through Dan s own admission, that he has no Public Company Management experience, never been a Director of a Public Company and has no Mining Business experience prior to Sarissa.
Shareholders have also been advised, through the US Government Department of Labor Legal Filings, that his direct previous position as Founder / President of a Investment Management and Commodity Trading Firm, ceased in approximately 2005. The reasons stated in the Legal Brief is due to "poor performance and a loss of clients".
It went on to say that "Byrnes has not voluntarily dissolved the Company" but around July 2010 "the Company was dissolved by proclamation of the New York Secretary of State".
The Lawsuit against Mr. Byrnes is for the recovery of retirement fund assets. The department’s complaint asks the court to have Byrnes provide an accounting of the plan’s assets and liabilities, gains and losses and any payments received or income earned by the plan since January 2011; restore all losses to plan stemming from his fiduciary breaches; offset any benefits due Byrnes from the plan; remove Byrnes as fiduciary and permanently prohibit him from serving as a fiduciary or service provider to any ERISA-covered plan. The department also asks for the appointment of an independent fiduciary with authority to marshal the plan’s assets, pursue claims on behalf of the plan, take appropriate actions for the plan’s rehabilitation or liquidation and distribute the plan’s assets to its participants, their beneficiaries and creditors.
Quote: “Daniel Byrnes not only violated the law through his behavior, he violated the trust that the plan’s participants placed in him,” said Susan Hensley, EBSA’s (Employee Benefits Services Administration) regional director in Boston. “We seek his removal and the appointment of an independent fiduciary to help undo his actions and allow plan participants access to their benefits.”
There is nothing (factual) in the Public Record to indicate that Sarissa Resources is in formal discussions / negotiations / deal reached with interested parties. The Company has not issued a News Release in Seven Months. The last Financial information filed by the Company was for the period ending March 31, 2015.
IMO if anyone can see a light at the end of the tunnel it is probably a train!
Thanks akbandit. If Management would apply solid Business practises the Company has a chance of success. Unfortunately in my opinion this group doesn t have the desire and / or ability. Have a nice weekend.
The Company could provide up to date Financial Statements - Quarterly s for example.
The Company could provide up to date information on work underway or planned on the Property.
The Company could provide the Shareholders / Investors a synopsis of plans underway / under consideration.
The Company could up date the Website, thereby the Shareholders, related to the Company s Business interests.
Such as
- Company efforts underway addressing the outstanding cease trade order that exists in a jurisdiction.
- efforts being undertaken by the President / Director of the Company in addressing the outstanding legal matter with the US Government Dept. of Labor. There are a substantial number of Sarissa Resources shares that the Government is attempting to seize from Mr. Byrnes to partially satisfy their legal claim.
- Financial Statements provided
- explanation of Corporate efforts undertaken during the past 14 months to turn around the Company
These are just a few matters that could be addressed by the Company. There are many more matters that could and should be provided to the Shareholders of Sarissa.
Communicate with the Shareholder base.
So the advice some offer is for a Public Company with over 930 million shares outstanding, representing a large number of Investors who provided funding for the Company at various intervals, to remain silent on the Company s current affairs and activities.
It makes no Business sense whatsoever.
Seven months without a word from the Company is outrageous.
IMO you are spot on with your cost analysis and conclusion however I do not understand the perception that some sort of illegal transaction (s) may have occurred.
The Company does not have current Financial Statements filed with the Regulators.
The Company does not have a fully compliant Geological Report filed.
The Company does not have a completed Preliminary Economic Assessment completed and filed.
The Company has not issued any formal Press Release in Seven Months.
The Price of the Company Shares is below One Cent.
IMO it is highly unlikely that anybody, individual or corporate, is "doing DD" on the Nemegosenda property or Sarissa Resources with the possible intent of joining the Board with attached funding (which I gather is the latest storyline).
The President of Sarissa, who apparently is the catalyst behind such a suggestion, is at least a nine hour drive away from Toronto. Has he actually met up with Scott in the past few months to discuss the implementation of a viable business plan - going forward?
IMO this is just all talk, conjecture and rumour mill generation at work?
The Company has not filed any Financial Statements (Quarterly Reports) since the quarter ending March 2015.
Filings for the Quarters ending June 2015 and September 2015 would be helpful in determining their financial position.
It should also be noted that Scott is a very large Creditor of both Sarissa and it s Sub, Niostar.
The Company s verbiage used to describe the recent Sarissa past events are very similar to the verbiage used during his tenure as President of the golf club.
http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=116328227
IMO there is nothing within the synopsis provided that can be considered encouraging.
I certainly hope that this is not the type of dialogue that has been exciting and encouraging Shareholders during the past 6, 7, 8 months etc.
Is this a Company response to an E Mail that you sent them?
Thank you for sharing an interesting story.
AND as noted in the story they apparently did a deal in one days time all noted in a Four page agreement. Quite amazing really.
The current rumour was started by one person posting on this Board earlier today.
There is no publicly known factual basis to rely on this " unsubstantiated leak of information ".
The interview sited was Six Years ago and probably well intentioned at the time.
However since that time the Company, and the various Management types that have participated through the years, have not performed to the levels required to establish a meaningful Mining or Public Company entity.
Therefore the Shareholders are left with a shell of a company with no discernible direction.
In a Company structure such as Sarissa Resources it is usually a matter of the current control group putting forth the names of a Board of Directors that they determine they want. In this case, as the controlling individual, it would be Scott Keevil providing instructions when the AGM materials are being readied for presentation.
The Company prepares the AGM documentation required to be provided to the Shareholders of Record which would include a listing of a Board among others items of interest that the Company determines, either by Law or Business practise, to inform Shareholders of.
While it is true that the holders of the registered Shares can vote them at the AGM it is most often only the votes of the control and insiders of the Company that are represented in the majority and the average shareholders are "no shows", hold non registered stock or simply are not interested in this aspect of the Company business.
For a group of Company shareholders who are not insiders of the Company to effect events or change they must be well organized, relatively well funded and have a very significant percentage of the registered shares able to vote directly or by proxy as a collective group at the AGM in order to have any chance in directing the Company s agenda. Even with that in place it is very likely that it wouldn't be enough.
The legal action suggestion is very costly and matters take years to adjudicate.
There are examples of Shareholder activism that have provided satisfaction and / or have resulted in changes within a Company.
I can understand the sentiment of some wanting Scott out however I don t believe that it is a realistic expectation. If I recall correctly he is the one that brought the Nemegosenda asset into the Company a number of years ago. As best we know all of the financial aspects outlined in the Financials Statements are legally binding and were completed in accordance with general Business practises. I am not sure that there is any reasonable basis to overturn previous transactions made within the Company.
IMO, if anything it is most likely that the want and desire, work ethic and ability is lacking opposed to there being anything underhanded - at least on the part of Scott.
Dan, the other half of the Sarissa Management team, has no mining or public company experience save for his time (14 months) with Sarissa.
Scott is independently wealthy and his position and involvement with Sarissa provides a purpose and an identity. I don t know that the heavy lifting aspect of the Business requirements is something of interest to him.
Dan, by all public information available, has had a difficult time in his business past.
While I agree with your "shovel" comment the Company really needs to get their Administration in order. From the Regulatory aspect (Full Financials, Complete Geological Reports, Communication that provides facts, whatever they may be, to the Shareholder base).
In order to attract a meaningful group of Mining Professionals to the Board as well as attracting Financial backers a Company requires an organization that not only seems interested and engaged but actually is.
The issue with calling the Company, as some suggest, is that it does not allow for any accountability for what may be said by Management. I fully appreciate why some receive comfort when they speak to a Company representative however it has no real meaning.
In previous conversations with Company management many things were said and very little of what was said has occurred. In fact much of what was provided, through PR s, has not occurred. In fairness some of the early "Dan PR s" did result in relatively minor results however they seemingly have stalled yet again.
If there are negotiations going on between the Company and others it is both easy and appropriate to share that fact with the Shareholder base. It is also entirely appropriate and responsible for Management to update the Shareholder as to what the Company may be doing in the Field, Geological reports / updates, what the Company may be doing administratively to resolve issues (such as the cease trade matter) or any other Business related issues that offer fact, combined with hope of future success, to the individual stakeholder.
There is very little that an individual shareholder can do to influence the operations and business affairs of a Company other than to provide an opinion in a forum that other shareholders of the Company have access too.
Respectful and considered communication, whether the individuals opinions differ or not, is the only method that a group of shareholders can establish some influence over the business realities that they are a part of.
Whether it is important or not to you, I like es1, have found your posts to be by and large informative and reasoned.
I am not negative as to the potential of the property asset however I am negative as to how the Business has been handled over the years. IMO not much as changed under Dan s leadership.
Of course small start up type businesses have all sorts of issues however they have been at this for eight years. There is no question that some of the silliness put up by non insiders of the Company infiltrates one s thought process however the Company Management does nothing to counter or help themselves, and the Shareholder, in this regard.
Serious Business people apply serious attitude to the Business that they have been entrusted with to operate.
All I ask is that the Management of Sarissa Resources act responsibly and respect the Shareholder of the Company.
That IMO is seriously lacking.
I ll leave that to others if they so choose to do so.
I merely want the Management to take their responsibilities seriously and operate the Company as a serious Business venture.
From my vantage point based on the lack of creditable factual information available publicly this is not occurring.
Fourteen Months since Dan Byrnes assumed the supposed Operations mantle of the Company and there is absolutely nothing concrete to show for it save for the:
-completion of a subsidiaries Financial Statement(s) for two previous years,
-an incomplete NI report,
-a minor and inconsequential drilling program,
-initial hiring / discussions with Service Providers
It has been:
-six months since the Company communicated publicly with it s Shareholders
-no updated activities reports / information on the Company Website for numerous months - for an equal amount of time I estimate
-no Financial Statements filed on Sarissa Resources with the Transfer Agent or Regulators for several quarters
IMO interest in the Company affairs by Management, whether Scott or Dan, seems almost non existent. Are they actually doing anything at all?
Except for gossip commentary by non Insiders of the Company there is nothing sustaining the minimal pricing of Sarissa shares. Hard to imagine that can continue much longer.
Work the Asset in a business like manner, communicate with the Investor / Shareholder base in a timely manner and have a Business Plan that is viable.
I wonder what is so wrong with operating the Company like a real Business?
The past calls to The Company have provided little fact and much rhetoric. Sounds very much as the status quo remains.
If the Company has factual information to provide the Shareholders then they can supply it via their Website, for example, enabling that all Shareholders have access equally. If warranted they can issue a Press Release.
IMO the Sarissa market pricing is artificial and can not withstanding any selling pressure.
The Selling of a significant block is not a reasonable option for any Shareholder. There simply is no meaningful Market for the securities.
Sarissa Resources, trading below a penny, with a neophyte President / Director and saviour
- " in tough negotiations with a very qualified and professional group of individuals interested in" the "property".
- Suggestions of Lawsuits against Sarissa Officers and Directors for fictitious legal infractions.
- New Board of Directors. New Management.
On each of these topics absolutely no facts were provided by the author(s) to substantiate the claims made.
If the belief that something illegal occurred in the Operations of the Company, and that a specific persons, or persons, is / are directly responsible then legal action of some sort may be viable. That said if an individual, or group of individuals, believe that some form of economic restitution is available to satisfy a claim such action may be warranted.
However the initial Legal Fees required would be relatively substantial. Hard to imagine that any legal action, if actually warranted, could commence without a sizeable legal retainer.
If such an action were to be considered which jurisdiction would one commence such an action? Ontario? Nevada?
What would be the goal? Financially who would benefit? How does an individual benefit? How would the Company benefit?
While I can t imagine that there is any legal basis to go forward with such a suggestion I will wait "to learn" if indeed someone follows through. Might have to wait five plus years to find out while it goes through the legal process but it would be entertaining.
I am sorry but I don t understand. Go after Scott K for what exactly?
Which begs the question - Why is Sarissa not filing current Financial Reports with the Regulators?
IMO this Board is extremely fair in allowing an exchange of opinions about the Company, it's Officers and the Business affairs of Sarissa Resources. Some of the thoughts are considered and some are merely reactionary or even purposely misleading however I am of the opinion that at the core most understand the differences between each expression of interest provided.
The Management of Sarissa, for a variety of reasons, is unwilling to operate the Business and communicate with it s Shareholders in the manner that they committed they would. That is a great shame. The Management - Scott and Dan - are doing a great disservice to the Company s Shareholder base.
Agreed. IMO the last Private Placement funds were primarily expended in the Field, Legal, Geological and Accounting Fees and likely settling some outstanding administration costs (rent, phone etc) along with keeping the doors open for the past year. The Company reported, over a year ago, that the Private Placement was completed and fully funded at that time.
Most, if not all, PR s since that time have been released primarily under Dan s name. Albeit not many PR s however he is the most quoted individual and he apparently is the IR and apparent Company / Shareholder conduit.
As Officers and Directors of Sarissa Scott and Dan both have the responsibility.
I have maintained that the Sarissa Website is being under utilized. Many of the communication issues, Company to the Shareholder, could be resolved simply by supplying regular updates to the base - and thereby to any interested individuals in the general Market.
It can be done without potentially compromising negotiations that may be occurring.
The Company has been silent on all aspects of the Business for the past Six Months.
Is it any wonder that the Stock s performance is dismal?
IMO your comments are generally fair and balanced. Sarissa is hovering in and around the penny mark simply due to the fact that they cannot execute on any viable plan. Potential exists for something much better, corporately and share price wise, however for various reasons that possibility keeps slipping away.
It went broke and Dan was the only Principal - at least according to the Lawsuit filed by the US Government - Dept of Labor Filing.
There has been no deal announced by the Company.
There is no " new " Board of Directors announced by the Company.
There has been no illegal type accusations made against Scott by any Legal Authority.
IMO your comments on Sarissa s position is entirely reasonable. That said while I agree that the hope is there that Dan has a chance to pull something positive off there is really no historical reason to believe he can. There is no evidence that anything is actually occurring within the Company and there is nothing publicly known about Dan to indicate that he has the Business experience / acumen to organize and close on a Mining deal.
Dmbao posted the following on august 25/14 - the Company must be following this road map.
"They are true professionals doing everything right. It's not hard to do. Raise the money and implement the geologist recommendations and keep everyone informed and promote the project."
IMO - The best Business position is to assume it is all gossip and has no basis in fact.
If the Company issues a PR providing specific factual details then one can consider what is said. Until that happens there is nothing.
Daniel Byrnes is President / Director of Sarissa Resources.
“Daniel Byrnes not only violated the law through his behavior, he violated the trust that the plan’s participants placed in him,” said Susan Hensley, EBSA’s regional director in Boston. “We seek his removal and the appointment of an independent fiduciary to help undo his actions and allow plan participants access to their benefits.”
Court: U.S. District Court for the Northern District of New York
Docket Number: 1:15-cv-00093-FJS-RFT
Media Contacts:
Ted Fitzgerald, (617) 565-2075, fitzgerald.edmund@dol.gov
Andre J. Bowser, (617) 565-2074, bowser.andre.j@dol.gov
From an magazine article written several years ago which included commentary about Dan Byrnes and his Company - Fort Orange Management - a Company that ceased operations.
-- Fort Orange Capital Management in Albany is an area investment firm that specializes in managed futures. The company makes money for its investors by purchasing commodity futures, such as oil, sugar and gold, with the anticipation that the commodities will later be sold at a price higher than they were purchased. Daniel Byrnes has owned the firm since 1996. Unlike brokerage houses such as Charles Schwab and Merrill Lynch, Fort Orange stays out of the stock and bond markets and tries to forecast the developments in the world of commodities. --------
Apparently this was the Byrnes / Fort Orange investment philosophy. How then can you then take a registered Retirement Plan and invest over 90 percent of it s worth into a Penny Stock Company? It makes no Business sense whatsoever that a person would place themselves, as well as jeopardizing their Business position, to make such an ill advised investment decision.
Since the word "criminal" is being used so freely doesn t Daniel Byrnes dealing with the Registered Retirement Fund qualify as criminal action?
That matter is actually before the Courts.