You sure about that....this certainly looks like him..

www.equitygroups.com/otcbb/ipwg.html - 24k

Perhaps more interesting, Hawk, is someone posting to IPWG who has been noticeably absent from GRC boards in more recent times ie 'good news next week' and 'pps of 30$ by xmas'.......our confident positive guru MITK.

Presume your info via a shareholder was connected with the overview update on the website...

"Our commercialization options include relationships that could result in joint ventures and technology licensing"

....although it would be very nice if it was more than that.

Still would be very helpful to have regular investor update re progress (hopefully) of the technology eg is the tube issue completely sorted.
nb see other board for patent info.

Good positive stuff, Newt, and very welcome if substantiated...but wouldn't you expect some strong market reaction or is it too early?

A red appeared before post was completed...no surprise there.Back to the GF bonfire.....

No sells and nearly an hour of trading....how impressive....here's to a completely green day.

Except the whinge is with GRC and continued non action. Been nearly 2 years on tubes...wonder if they figured out which to use yet? LOL

"BIG NEWS COMIN"

Tel...would you like to expand/qualify/detail?

The 'news' needed for long suffering longs is conversion and contracts, in either order but SOON, not 1 or 2 years time.It is entirely unsatisfactory that we are still waiting for completion of the registration process in particular. IMO

"until the conversion is finalized, one can't purchase them anyway"

Its now over 3 months since the last S1A was submitted to the SEC. It is highly unlikely that the SEC has taken all this time to respond, which leaves the conclusion that further queries are being worked on by GRC OR they do not want to convert at this time.Maybe Hawk has really 'thrown a big spanner into the works' re the dubious question of the 7.13 MSRM/GBRC conversion factor? Pity GRC doesn't believe in regular updates for investors with regard to matters such as this. It could only result in better relations if it was the case.IMO

Surely this is just 'cloaked' new funding which may or may not be used for future R&D in shale etc but more likely just to keep the the ship afloat.

"Look for the conversion to become effective in the next few daYS."

KP...if there is any liklihood of this happening what market response should we be expecting, bearing in mind multiple previous discussions on this issue? The current negative pps seems to me to reflect the concern/wariness of many re the recent news, which has been presented in a somewhat 'low-key' manner to say the least.

Significant or coincidence... from 10Q in August 08 to Oct 08 GRC filed 10 documents with the SEC: since the 10Q in August 09 to now there have been precisely none. This can mean that 1. all paperwork is up to date and there have been no significant issues or 2. GRC have closed down administration or 3.they are awaiting SEC response from the S1 submission in JULY or 4. GRC is working on their response to possible comments by the SEC re July's S1 or 5. something else. Or maybe GRC staff complement have all passed away........and the only ones left are the sad investors....the entertaininmg ones having long since bailed out.

"It doesn't appear to have as many applications as grc's machine".

Probably true...but perhaps the missing word in the above is 'potential'. Until a 'sorted' machine is in the field it's difficult to see anyone jumping on board. Will we have to wait for a 'result' from the Schlumberger deal, which at this moment in time is still surely quite a way off?

An order and conversion would be most welcome...in any order, although the latter would at least provide some control of destiny for many.AIMO

See also

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/technology/8290130.stm

Good but increasingly concerning info! Stable door and horse spring to mind re GRC. No news is definitely bad news and continued, apparent lack of progress is definitely bad news. Will all the 'business' be taken before GRC gets its act together? Maybe TC was a lot nearer the truth than many would ever acknowledge.

Agree to all that.....but the proof of the pudding is in the eating, so here's hoping for clear sunshine and soon!

Well played........one of my long time favourites (along with CCRs' Bad Moon Rising). Since conversion is likely to be followed by 'sells' plus,plus, I thought contract(s)more likely for SITA.

Price and Volume improved......wonder if this is 'Thunderclap Newman' based? If it is, contract related would be rather nice.

Amazing....we have a new 'New Video'

http://globalresourcecorp.ir.stockpr.com/video/view/233/grc-video-2009

Lack of transparency re registration/conversion (unlikely that the SEC has not responded to the last GRC submission in JULY) leads to continuing frustration with this company. There surely is no reason why GRC cannot keep investors updated on this issue apart from deliberate policy not to.

Unfortunately your comments look all too accurate...and continued 'nil action' is all too ominous. I guess many still left standing are of the 'captive' variety.

'Attention to detail' is not a recognised quality demonstrated so far by GRC and their responding to 'message board posts' is at best variable if it happens at all. Wonder if GRC level of competence is typical of most US companies. Even if the video WAS made when the last demos were done some time back and the problem rectified already, publishing this weeks' 'news' without checking the content was typical of this company and maybe indicative of why contracts seem to be 'light years' away. I would be very happy to be wrong.AIMO

Sun...maybe you should set up a meeting with Messrs Brown and Worthington (LOL)..or maybe....just maybe Worthington/GRC are up to speed and its all in hand!! That said, the present 'dead zone' is very disappointing and contracts aside, I was hoping the third quarter would see 'effectiveness' declared by the SEC followed by conversion... but it's looking more and more unlikely as the year draws to a close. IMO

Shouldn't that be 'Limey' rather than 'Pommy' with the company being a US entity?...plus you must have made an Ihub record with the same post!

"Don't you believe it"...my 'progressive' comment was meant to be very 'tongue in cheek!'. Whether they do look at boards or not (and TC's supposed legal chastisement maybe confirms that) it certainly doesn't seem to result in much productive response, directly or indirectly.Maybe there are GRC connected posters using the boards...but after you were banned ...maybe not, or was that just to do with the actual nature of what you posted whilst employed by them?

Even if he does, it's still only 'water off a ducks' back to GRC, the progressive company who look after their shareholders...

That's correct.....just assumed it hadn't got thro'...although there might have been other reasons......there are more if you're interested and not easily offended.
On business issues, I presume US also has a holiday today...so no trading.If not info should be due in about an hour.

You 'technically' hit the nail on the head a lot of the time and unfortunately there remains a lack of GRC evidence to contradict your viewpoint. Since I have been long for what is now years, I obviously hope I am wrong and they get there finger out sooner rather than later, cos later is likely to be too late.IMO

KPs' offering is reasonable but nothing representing here springs to mind although I sure can think of a few to fit....

so will you (via your fledgeling) beat GRC to the draw?

Now that you mention it ...where is 'the big man'?:not gone the way of the 'leading lights' on our opposing board, perchance? Maybe he finally got fed up of all the abuse...

London is about 250 miles away...wonder if PW ever comes north?

"No one on this board is in charge of updating the web site, so feel free to chew on them directly"

KP..is that so! you surprise me. Notwithstanding your wit, I made no mention in my last post that suggested anyone on this board was in any way responsible for the GRC website maintenance. However, what I was trying to highlight,as you are probably fully aware, was poor 'housekeeping' on the part of 'our company' and the wrong impression for investors...new and longs alike, that the continued use of a rejected CEO creates: hardly good practice. My experience of the use of 'direct chewing' is not good. I never get the curtesy of a response...even if it is just to maybe 'correct' my viewpoint.
I must have upset them too much...
As to the conference call....yes, I agree PW was very positive, sounded genuine and said the right things.....but the proof of the pudding is in the eating....another year gone by and still no contracts. He said nothing in the call re the registration process that we haven't known for several years and my point was that the last S1 amendment was filed 20th July and now, nearly 6 weeks later where is an update from GRC to say either 'SEC are still examining' or 'GRC are further responding'. Is that too difficult for them? Maybe I should 'pop' down to London to have a quick word with PW??

Maybe good......but not so good on the website is the use of a 'sacked' CEO in a so-called 'new video' on what GRC is about.

It is also past time for an update from GRC as to where the 'ball' is with regard to the registration process ie SEC or GRC.There is no reason why GRC cannot say that they are responding to further SEC requests...should that be the case.

Good to see you both back in the groove and even singing to each other.......Hawk...I had a quick look thro, the S1A and didn't see anything re whether the 1:7.183 would still be applied/confirmed for those holding when 6:1 was effected. I might have missed it or would it be in other filings?

S1 at last....over to the SEC!

http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1128949/000101968709002494/0001019687-09-002494-index.htm

http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1128949/000101968709002463/globalres_8k-070209.htm


SWAIN gone........might explain the absence of certain supporters of his on this and another board in the recent weeks.

To confirm:my understanding is that whether you have GRC or MSRM or anything else, if you buy as a UK investor from outside the States then your share certificates are likely to be restricted by legend and ...yes after a holding period you should be able to have that legend removed by the company.

The following links contain detailed info but may give you some further insight.

http://www.sec.gov/answers/regis33.htm

http://www.law.uc.edu/CCL/33ActRls/regS.html

If you hold GRC shares then you would not need to wait for registration/conversion of CRC/MSRM shares (hopefully this year!!) but could sell as soon as your legend was lifted under the SEC rules ie 12 month holding (minimum I believe but sometimes longer) and company permission.IMO

Interesting...and I very much agree with your sentiment/logic especially since I would also greatly benefit should what you say be correct. However, do you have evidence of SEC written regs to support this?

http://www.sec.gov/answers/restric.htm

Don't think that is strictly true, either, Hawk. MSRM shares held for a minimum stipulated period can be deresricted and sold but only with agreement by GRC. Jeff Andrews offered this facility to me way back after I had held for 2 years and I believe it is within the SEC regulations. However, the MSRM price has been so low there obviously was just no point in selling.

Just to repeat Ashdost.....this is a typical scam approach....keep well away.