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.
Z, do you know what other Chinese RTO's have hired attorneys/forensic accountants and they subsequently resigned due to stonewalling by management?
facially inconsistent with the company's solicitation of Kung to reconsider -- and Kung's agreement to suspend the effectiveness of his resignation for a week.
That could have been either face-saving or an offer to have him keep his title but have no authority.
Look at the Kung resignation letter again. The first line says he believed he was powerless as Audit Committee Chair, but the next line tells us that the independent investigation (Piper) was in the process of being conducted.
except that Mr. Kung's resignation letter indicated that he did not believe he could execute his fiduciary duties and roles as independent director and Chairman of the Committee to choose capable and appropriate independent professional advisors to the Audit Committee. An independent investigation is being conducted by the Audit Committee into certain matters identified by the Company's former auditors at the time of their resignation
I'm guessing Piper set it up this way on purpose, so there's a firewall between the company and the forensic auditor. The BOD must have approved this set up too. Is this what Kung didn't like? To go about this right, Piper more than likely pushed his resignation because he wasn't really independent. The new arrangement with Piper took away his authority and makes his resignation claims literally correct.
except that Mr. Kung's resignation letter indicated that he did not believe he could execute his fiduciary duties and roles as independent director and Chairman of the Committee to choose capable and appropriate independent professional advisors to the Audit Committee. An independent investigation is being conducted by the Audit Committee into certain matters identified by the Company's former auditors at the time of their resignation
I don't think the act of retaining Piper required an 8-k. My guess is they got them involved a while back. They are a crisis response team. The crisis happened on and around March 11. Why they have waited until now to disclose is a mystery to me, unless they know the halt is being lifted tomorrow and want to put out something positive in advance.
Hiring them means Z.C. is serious about defending himself and preserving the status of the company. Here's the link explaining what they do. I've been reading up on them and found it interesting. I thought I'd share this because I haven't seen it posted here yet.
http://www.dlapiperrapidresponse.com/experience/approach.html
Did the other companies hire Piper? Did they also get an accounting firm involved like this case?
Is the HK exchange more lax on reporting requirements than NASDAQ/SEC?
Can you complete your post please.
one take away i got from the discussion is that NASDAQ would have publish (PR) that it is being dislisted and provide effective date.
Are you saying Nasdaq would have published a PR that CCME is being delisted and would have provided a date for such delisting? Since that did'nt happen, CCME is not being delisted?
person also said the that hearings are scheduled typically about 3-6 from the date of appeal
What time frame? Days, weeks, months? TIA.
Many postings of caution on here pre-halt were deleted within an hour.
Personally, I think Glickenhaus has been duped like the rest of us. I think shorts are right that fraud exists in CCME. They are right, but for all the wrong reasons. Since the facts they presented didn't hold water and were refuted, longs tended to side with the company. Incredibly, the company obviously does have enormous problems, unrelated to what the shorts claimed, but big issues nontheless, causing the situation we now face.
I see how the Chinese justify the death penalty in these cases. The perpertrator of this type of fraud is one of no conscience. To the Chinese, this is someone without a spirit, thus death is simply organic. Americans grant sentient holy spirit to all humans beings. That's why Madoff lives.
So Andrew, as a lawyer, what are you doing? Anything? You can PM me with your answer, but I'm not a paying member so thats why I can't reply.
I've read the Nasdaq rules and can't find where Public Interest Concern specifically indicates fraud. Can you reference a rule number?
http://www.sec.gov/pdf/nasd1/4000ser.pdf
Fascinating, thanks. The certainty of the shorts that CCME and CAGC are frauds is amazing and disconcerting. Especially since some of their facts just don't add up.
This certainty they possess though,is what originally kept me from investing too much in CCME. So at least for now, I am grateful to the Waldo Mushmans out there. They kept my potential losses down to a managable size.
before closing in late 2007 after losing roughly one third of its value due to an illiquid investment."
Wow thats incredible. I wonder, was it a halted stock like CCME?
Andrew-
Why so many deleted posts? What's the reason for the deletions?
Send the letter you sent the SEC to the appropriate party at Nasdaq and see what response you get.
I would think that the wording "still suspended" at the end of the SEC letter should read "still halted"....in the interest of accuracy.
This type of mistake in communication is unacceptable imo. A professional working for the SEC should at a minimum be expected to understand the regulations and terminology.
Then why are they saying it is suspended in this response letter?? That's the point I am trying to make.
http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=62353157
Please read the response from the SEC
http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=62353157
Exactly, you would think SEC's response would be accurate.
On April 4, 2011, CCME announced that Nasdaq had sent the company a letter stating that Nasdaq was exercising its discretionary authority under Listing Rule 5101 to suspend the company’s common stock from trading on Nasdaq effective the opening of business on April 12, 2011, subject to the company’s right to appeal such determination to a hearing panel not later than April 8, 2011. As of April 22, 2011, trading in CCME’s common stock is still suspended.
This makes it sound like there is no appeal by the company against the suspension.
I'd send this out as a longshot. Is there any harm in it? Any of the attorneys on here care to comment?
Thanks, I like the idea of getting back to covering what business there is and how its doing.
Can you get any further information from the employee's area of knowledge and expertise that would add to what we know? Like how are sales going? Busses? New contracts? Morale? Why are they advertising for so many new positions? We are focusing on the management drama, but is the company still in operation?
"Well i just got off the blower with a contact of mine in China who works for CCME."
I'm having a really hard time believing that statement.
The big question is why hasn't/didn't the SEC step in on this earlier? They are supposed to protect investors. How did a massive fraud from an entire group of companies get perped right under their nose? How is it that hedge funds knew about it and no one else?
They are liable imo. How's about a class action suit for all CGS RTO stockholders against the SEC to be made whole? They are the deepest pockets to go after.
Trader, do you know about the Frankfurt exchange? I seem to remember that CCME was being traded there too at one point. Its a way to naked short stocks. Do you or anyone else know if CCME can or is still being traded on it, even though there is a Nasdaq halt?
There's zero benefit for the company to release any PR now.
Agreed. Why give shorts any foreknowledge of anything. It works to the advantage of those who are long for the company to remain silent on everything until it trades again.
Yeah, who knows though, maybe he made phone calls.
Are these your opinions? I went back and looked at your previous posts and can't find any links or other facts to back up this new claim of yours.
How would you know factually the CEO is/has been in cahoots with short hedge funds? Is it something you found in the Starr lawsuits?
Specifically, the Company has failed to file its Annual Report on Form 10-K with the Securities and Exchange Commission on a timely basis. The Company has appealed this determination and requested a hearing before a NASDAQ hearing panel
So they did file a financial report??
Were some brokers still lending CCME on margin? Fido wasn't.
I'm sure too the exchange and SEC is investigating the trading of CCME for irregularities. The company may have accounting problems, but that doesn't exempt traders from following the rules.
Thanks. I understand that this is pure conjecture. You nor I have any knowledge or facts whatsoever in regard to this strictly what-if scenario.
$11.5 million would not take out Starr.
Sherm, to test your hypothesis. Do you know the amount of the dividend that the Lin's are receiving from thier WIYU shares and is it conceivably enough to buy back Starr's shares?
In light of this report, that DTT is taking back the previous audit, any previous communications and pretty much saying this thing is FUBAR ( Item 4.02), its looking pink. WTF were they doing during 2010 anyway? Napping?
I'm going to say 90% write off at this point. Anyone have a shred of hope left to offer?
I've come across many people that act like you in my time and have always been dissapointed in what knowledge is eventually communicated. Maybe you are different, though, and have found a very reliable predictor that makes you a lot of money (or keeps you from losing it). I wish you success. But the only way I'm going to believe it is seeing proof it meets statistical significance.
I personally doubt Value Investor can help you spot future frauds. Sounds like he has some type of financial formula he's developed as a bankruptcy predictor. Since he's not sharing it, you aren't going to benefit. Don't feel bad though because its probably is a rough tool anyway, as most financial ratios tend to be. They are right sometimes, wrong at others, and just flat out ridiculous in some cases.
Valueinvestor would have to at a minimum provide a published reseach paper that gives an explanation and validity to his capital ratio. That requires more than some article on a blog. Coming on here and playing a little cat and mouse game about how much he knows and how he can predict future frauds is a bit silly, despite his authorative tone.
That said, one would be reasonable to assume that the input of resignations of auditor, CFO and one independent Director would cause an accounting fraud detection formula to lean positive. But I think we all know that already.
I'm not saying Cheng and the rest of his loyal board are totally innocent. I'm just comparing this situation to a lot of others that are out there right now in the same boat. As far as internal strife between management, a BOD, regulators and auditors, every company I've ever worked for has experienced it to one degree or another. I was at one bank where some of the Board sued the Investment department for recommending a particular REIT that went south. They won and collected through the banks insurance. I'm just saying this type of stuff is more common than you realize. Again, not being any less skeptical of CCME manangement, but keep it in perspective.
A lot of growing companies face challenges with internal controls. High growth quickly swamps internal systems designed to monitor, count, collect, maintain, and report a lot of facets of the business. While everyone was excited about CCME's reported growth, few questioned whether or not the systems they had in place could effectively manage the growth. This does not lead to fraud per se, but it usually results in inaccurate finacial reporting. Auditors will bring this out and require onerous changes to protect themselves as they are already in the middle of it and concerned about thier situation. This is a point where a lot of small companies will change auditors, sometimes frequently. Believe me, research it and you will find quite a few companies, all over the world, that are changing auditors, all the time. Not all are fraudulent companies, very few are. They are just going through growing pains.
I find it strange how the public investing mind goes from one extreme to the other real fso quickly. Its the greatest company ever to the biggest fraud since Bernie Madoff. The investor psychology displayed in the CCME case is one that should be studied and documented imo.
1. China Media Express is the only company that authorized by China Government and Main business is Bus Audio media system. It has many companies in China.
Glad he confirms the gov't monopoly, but do you know what he means by CCME having many companies in China?
But I am not sure how many we sold to them every year, Maybe between 3000-4000pcs.
How many years has he been selling to them?
Normally this company bought bus lcd monitors from several different company including us.
This indicates that more have been purchased, than the 3K-4K per year.
3. I see your photo, and I know Where the photo from It is a Video that made by an foreign customer. That products is what we make, It is a bus monitor, And linked to a hard disc player(in the front of the car) . Then it can broadcast the advertisement.
What photo did you send him? WCTBill's?
Did you correspond with Tony in Chinese or English? If accurate, this does prove that indeed there is some business going on at CCME. Its sanctioned and supported by the Chinese government, giving them sort of a monopoly. And that they have at least 3K-4K busses providing content, probably more. Good job and thanks for sharing it.