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.
Question
Why does my board message list jump from post #62502 to #62520? It skips the posts in between. I don't have any of those in between on ignore. It's been happening for a while now. I'd appreciate an answer....or a theory, at least.
Outside accounting firms
have often been censured for applying lipstick and perfume on their supposed disinterested reports....sometimes at the implied or explicit request of the principals. Think about it. It's called job security.
Companies often use them as convenient scapegoats when the skeletons show up. :)
It happens all the time. Remember this one?
http://www.findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m1355/is_15_101/ai_84645545
Vern
I agree they'd rather see GTEM disappear but do they really have to make it happen?. The DARPA thing is a cash cow and will likely continue, regardless....No.? All they have to do is collect the money and continue their research till they get it right, regardless of how long it takes.
At this jucture I don't think GTEM represents anything more than a pesky gnat.
Vern
I don't believe for a NY second that GTEM will be the beneficiary of ANY Congressional inquiry at the expense of Lockheed. Lockheed is so entrenched in the corruptive culture of the Federal Government, they will always benefit from their past experiences and promises of cushy jobs upon governmental retirement.
They have lots of money to spread around....something GTEM doesn't have....yet. Money still talks, regardless of the virtue of the project. History is rife with contracts let to companies with inferior products or projects that never got off the drawing board, based solely upon the clout the company has with those who hold the purse strings. If some Congressman decides he/she wants to open an investigation into comparative projects, the Chairman of that committee has to bless it, first. Typically, Chairmen have significant seniority and have been around long enough to be the recipient of big bucks. GTEM's potential as a successful governmental vendor will be as secretive to the general public as Area 51. :) The situation, I fear, would never see the light of day.
I don't believe GTEM will ever land a government contract on its own. I suspect the only entree into that field will be on the coattails of some larger entity already in the pockets of the right people.
I'm sure I've said nothing you don't already know. You ain't no kid. :)
Sorry doc
I'm not signed up for the private function.
doc
Good post. I think we're both optimists and I , for one, would have it no other way so long as I'm holding the stock.
Considering what Putin and the tovarish have done to Shell and will most likely do to BP, the fact that the Russian thing never came off for us might have been a blessing in disguise. That cabal would never have allowed a successful venture without extracting a large price or perhaps taking it over, completely, once it was established. I hope the company stays away from those South American Leftists, too. Of course, if Chavez gets his way, there may not be many countries left to deal with. :)
Please check your private board for a personal message.
Merry Christmas and Happy New Year to all.
The question is...
who's investigating the SEC?
doc
Consider what the Russians have done to Shell. No way was GTEM going to control activities there. We're lucky to have been done with them early on. It was probably a stroke of luck that the deal fell through.
I agree
If they invoke the "weather permiting" caveat, even if it's true, that can really screw things up. I can hear investors say, here we go again.
Error!
"definitely" should be "indefinitely".
doc
If the SEC is as corrupt as most think it is, who knows what forces might be at work in stringing out the "investigation", definitely? Every day's delay plays into the hands of those who want this company to fail.
Like the man said, don't hold your breath.
siriusly
Bingo! I have to reiterate. I know nothing of German Bankruptcy Law beyond that which I posted a while ago but a bankruptcy filing doesn't just appear and mysteriously disappear relatively quickly without some meaningful action on both counts, particularly the latter. My guess is the filing had no standing to begin with.
I hope the company explains what happened. It's not a small thing and we deserve an explanation....especially since it appears to have been resolved, favorably.
tfl
I'll make this easy to understand. Just think of Magic money as an arm with gangrene. Yeah, it used to have value and you'd like to save it but now you just have to cut it off.....to save your life.
Capish?
trunkmonk
I found the following excerpt on page 5 of this link:
http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m4130/is_n3_v25/ai_19161963/pg_1
"C. The German Code
Current German bankruptcy law consists of two codes: Konkursordnung, or compulsory liquidation, and Vergleichsordnung, or composition proceedings. In July 1994, new bankruptcy legislation was passed. The new code is scheduled to come into force in 1999.
Currently, the most commonly used procedure is compulsory liquidation. In compulsory liquidation, control of the assets of the firm is transferred from management to the konkursverwalter (insolvency administrator), an insolvency practitioner typically appointed by the court. A creditors' committee supervises the insolvency administrator.
Although the administrator's directive is to sell the firm for cash, there is no rush to sell off the firm's assets. There is, in effect, an unlimited stay against unsecured creditors, and the administrator can raise new senior financing. Thus the administrator can keep a firm alive if he deems economic conditions to be unfavorable for a sale, for example, there may not be liquid markets for some assets such as office buildings or manufacturing plants. That the administrator has great powers to take his time in selling the insolvent firm is illustrated by the average duration of the typical konkursverfahren. According to Gessner et al. (1978) in a study commissioned by the German Federal Ministry of Justice, the average time spent in compulsory liquidation is 27.5 months.
The composition proceeding is a relatively recent addition to the statutes and is an alternative to compulsory liquidation. However, it is seldom used; in 1992, only 0.3% of all insolvencies were composition proceedings while 25% of insolvencies entered into compulsory liquidation. Composition proceedings were more common in the past. In 1960, they amounted to 16% of all insolvencies, while in 1974 they amounted to only 7% (Landfermann, 1994)."
The description of a "composition proceeding" and the administrator's duties are on page 6. The entire article is interesting.
Check out this link: http://w3.univ-tlse1.fr/iae/files/7_pdf.pdf
The table on pages 3 and 4 gives you a decent comparative overview of a number of countries.
I have a better idea of how Germany's system works. I also now know it favors the creditor as opposed to the US Code which favors the company.
Jim and Axel
Thanks to both of you for giving me a better insight to this situation and German insolvency procedures.
Axel, you said there is no procedure similar to a US Chapt 11. Does that mean, once a bankruptcy filing is made by a company, the only outcome is the liquidation of the assets and thus the breakup of the business? Is there no way for a company to shield itself from the pressure of its creditors? In a US Chapt 11, the court sanctions a payment schedule designed to satisfy the creditors over a period of time. This allows the business to continue as an ongoing entity, with the understanding that they will not incur future liability beyond the ordinary course of business. Doesn't Germany have anything similar to this? Maybe you can get the answer from that lawyer. Maybe the simple answer is yes and the provision for such a process is all inclusive.
The answer to my question is important. If the filing was lawfully made by KB, and it has merit, that means there's only one possible outcome.....the end of GTEW.....unless there's an alternative process to save it. Maybe the alternative lies in the hands of the Governor who can relinquish control back to the company GM if the situation improves or a white knight rides into the picture. :>)
Jim
I still don't know if anyone filed on behalf of the company. See below from your translation:
"13 in 705/06 in the insolvency application procedure about the property of the Globetel Wireless Europe GmbH, Riemenstrasse 30, 74906 baths Rappenau, vertr. d .: Klaus Bonn, Riemenstrasse 30, 74906 baths Rappenau, (managers) was arranged on 03.11.2006, at 11.00 o'clock, for the protection of the future insolvency mass and to the clarification of the circumstances (§§21, 22 InsO):"
Can you tell me if this definitely means Klaus Bonn filed an "insolvency procedure" on behalf of GTW or on behalf of himself?
"Orders of the debtor about the objects of her property are effective only with approval of the temporary insolvency governor (§21 paragraph 2 No. 2 InsO)"
I don't understand the debtor being described as "her". Not knowing anything about the German language or custom, are companies routinely described in the feminine form? There may be some things lost or confusing in translation. Are you a native German? You might have answered that already but , if you did, I missed it.
"To the debtors of the debtor (third debtors) is forbade to pay to the debtor. The temporary insolvency governor is authorized to draw bank balance and other demands of the debtor as well as to accept detailed money. The third debtors are asked to perform only considering this arrangement (§23 paragraph 1 sentence 3 InsO)."
Generally speaking, this is pretty much how things are done in the US. In that case, it's a court appointed trustee (governor in the above description) who manages the outlays and receipts. It's interesting that the words "temporary insolvency" are used in this filing. My guess is that it might take on the general character of a US Chpt 11 as opposed to a Chpt 7. Of course I'm just guessing because, in a Chpt 11, the debtor remains in possession of the company's affairs. I don't know anything about German insolvency proceedings. There might be major differences.
BTW, I'm not an attorney, but I did stay at a Holiday Inn Express last night.
nilremerlin
's OK. Kinda figured that, but was too good a set up to ignore.
>:)
nilremerlin
I didn't know Germany had a Sacramento too. Did I miss something?
:>):>)
Jim
Are we having a problem with semantics here? I believe there was a filing. You've convinced me of that. However, at this time we don't really know for a fact who filed it, do we? The word "bogus" has been bandied about here. To some ( and perhaps you ) the word "bogus" might be interpreted to mean the filing didn't occur. To others, it means the filing didn't occur. Some would say it means the filing did occur but it has no standing. It has been alleged that it has no standing because it was filed by someone who had no authority to file it.
I believe it was you who said an insolvency petition could be filed by a creditor or some other interested party(s) in Germany. I don't know anything about German bankruptcy laws but I do know the US bankruptcy code does provide for involuntary petitions. It then remains to be determined if the petition has merit.
Borrowing from the poet, "How do I love thee (or) How is a bankruptcy petition filed? Let me count the ways". :>)
Does anyone seriously think GTEM could compete with these 800 pound gorillas in winning this contract?
The company's reputation alone is sufficient to disqualify it. If you were making that decision, would you take a chance on this star-crossed mess?
Dream on!!
rocky
Great terms for whom? :>)
nilremerlin
Bingo on the bribe angle. GTEM couldn't compete. Nothing gets done in Russia with greasing the palms of the Russian politicians or the Russian Mafia. More than likely, they're pretty much co joined.
When the PR came out about the deal, I couldn't believe it and my skepticism was well placed. There were too many well entrenched Russians who would never allow an outside company to mine that gold field. GTEM simply didn't have the funds to compete. Had they actually landed the deal, much of the money would have been returned in the form of bribes.
Unfortunately, it's the way things work.....in the good ol USA, too.
Why does Ameritrade's streamer indicate 0.265 Bid and 0.40 ask?
ltt
Thanks!
http://www.businessjive.com/nss/darkside.html.
What a wonderful primer this is for people who have a difficult time understanding naked shorting and, more importantly, the brazen manner in which the DTCC is attempting to stonewall the investigation of FTDs.
I suggest everyone write their legislators and demand immediate action. It wouldn't hurt to contact their state reps, also. Somewhere out there some young politico is looking to make his/her political "bones" with a popular cause......someone who isn't in anyone's pocket....yet.
The people on this board should be particularly aggressive in fighting for this expose'. I'm conviced GTEM has been grievously wounded by this criminal activity, well beyond that which it has brought upon itself.
vk
To paraphrase a well known poet, Huff loved the company well but not wisely.
:)
Logandean
"However Rob said he could not get into it too much BUT I did manage to get one bit of info the Mexican roll out will be much larger than Russia"
Do you realize what you said? Tell me you realize what you said. Tell me this ain't deja vu all over again!
tgr
Don't you realize you have absolutely no chance to recoup anything significant from this/these lawsuits? We're not talking about asbestos or tobacco, here. Many of the companies who are fighting those cases are cash and asset rich.....and will most likely survive. GTEM is cash and asset poor.
Biiiiig difference!
vk
"Huff was always straight up with me......"
And Mussolini made the trains run on time. You can't judge someone on the basis of one virtuous act. No....I'm not saying Huff was duplicitous but he was incompetent as a CEO.
vk
Even if everything you say about GTEM's vindication happens, what would you sue for......the right to be relisted?
That's too funny.....:):):)
Other than that, forget about monetary damages. If they were lucky enough to prevail in a civil trial, the AMEX has the clout and resources to tie up the execution for years. GTEM can't compete.
risk
"......or do they intend to make Khoury the permanant ceo ?"
It wouldn't be the first time something like that happened.
Vern
"....... but has increased in size to where its volume is greater than the water it contains and thusly floats......."
Don't you mean the weight of the water it displaces is greater than it's own weight?
justfrank
I think you're seeing something in my post that isn't there. All, I said was the company is reorganizing (literally) without filing an 11. As to your claim that I was making some kind of fruit salad....not true. I'm eminently aware of the distinction.
nerd
Yep...what we have at this point is a reorg without resorting to Chap 11.
We shouldn't be surprised if the company amputates a limb or two to save the life of the patient.
mide
"One of the worst things Huff did as a manager was set up each sub as a seperate corporation, which we are now only learning, and are all being dissolved or reassigned...not clear yet.
Why he did this is beyond me...why?"
A simple answer............ to compartmentalize liability. It's done quite frequently. In my other life, I often experienced the frustration of attempting to collect funds from a corporation only to discover the liability was incurred under the auspices of another.
Then again it could have been for another reason. :)
justfrank
What's the preferred method to contact a board monitor about board business....on the board or some other way?
rwehap
"......If the cases go south, could the company use a reorg under Chapter 11 as protection?......"
The answer to that is a "qualified yes". Remember, however, the court might not grant a petition for reorg under an 11 for a myriad of reasons. .......one of which is the issue of fraud. Because there are outstanding allegations of fraud, the plaintiffs might convince the court to reject the petition alleging that the company is attempting to circumvent the civil action. It might punt the petition down the field until the law suits are resolved. However, It's possible the court could accept the petition with the understanding that, should there be additional liability established as a result of the civil action, the case would be reviewed for a possible redetermination. Bottom line? Who knows?
One thing I do know. The Bankruptcy Court is a powerful institution and pretty much does what it wants....with minimum oversight.
And yes.......I spent another night at a Holiday Inn Express.
mide
First of all I want to thank you for sharing your info from Bleckman but there appears to be a difference between your take of Bleckman's remarks about going to the OTC and the way I read the October, 11 PR on the subject.
Here's the excerpt:
"FORT LAUDERDALE, Fla.--(BUSINESS WIRE)--GlobeTel Communications Corp. today announced that shares of its stock now trade on the Pink Sheets under the symbol GTEM. The Company will keep its shareholders informed of the date on which trading will commence on the Over The Counter Bulletin Board." (bold mine)
When I originally saw that, it struck me as a done deal and all that remained was dotting the "Is". I venture to say there were others who felt the same way. Your information from Bleckman suggests that this is not a done deal.
I know some will say I'm splitting hairs but I don't see it that way. Either the PR was worded clumsily or the GlobeTel spin machine is still alive and well.
Which is it?
Vern
I'm not bitter about Huff like some. I saw a chance for a zinger and I took it. :)
I don't know if any of us will ever know who was primarily responsible for this adventure. If Huff has anything of value to bring to the company in his new and, apparently, tentative position, I truly hope he gets a chance to prove himself. He might just wind up in the right place for his skills. If he adds value, there's no reason why he should go.
This story's not over yet....lot's more to come.
doc
He's yankin' your chain.
Incidentally, thanks.
nerd
When things go this bad, EVERYTHING is suspect.
And in answer to your question, do you expect me to tell you when I also stopped beating my wife? Good try but no brass ring. :):)
We'll see how this plays out, eventually.