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.
Check with the transfer agent....he is responsible for getting a new symbol and CUSIP #
MUNCH, what are the grounds for your ban? Since I truly believe in free speech, I will support you in any way I can !!!
LEEBRET, you stated: "
"But the Company isn't having any trouble borrowing money from the European's for these acquisitions."
And you know this as a fact how?
Actually, I have no questions because I already know nothing has been filed :)
Actually, TRADE, I have absolutely no reason whatsoever
to contact Emas. I was providing a way for those who were ALREADY questioning the facts of the merger, name change, exchange change, etc., to possibly find answers to their questions. He is the SEC Counsel for the company, and would be the one most knowledgeable about all these aspects of the company.
Why is it that even if I try to help, everyone comes down on me?
Sorry BENZ, I thought you had probably been keeping up with the board.
Earlier I had suggested to all those asking questions about the name change; merger; board change; etc. to contact Joseph Emas, Nord's SEC Counsel. I provided his address and phone number.
It had absolutely nothing to do with digging up ghosts at all.
I think you should read the posts before you make negative comments. I was under the impression that that was your role as assistant moderator.
VICSTEELE, in an earlier post you wrote:
"I love this stock and I know that these guys are working their asses off in the background."
And you know this how?
Anyone try to get any info from the attourney yet?
If not, it sure is strange that everyone is clamoring for news or PR's, but don't bother to go to a source. Would it be that some DON"T want the facts, or that all those who claim to consistently be buying really aren't?
Just some common sense questions....
Well DOC, I do believe that Nord Oil was an American company
prior to its merger with Bio-Tracking Security. In fact, in one of the press releases concerning the proposed merger with North-West released to the Russian press it was described as such:
"Nord Oil is an American company with offices in Canada, though most of it resources are located in Russia"
As far as all the questions re: name change, exchange change, merger completion, etc., I am sure all can be answered by the company's SEC Counsel
Joseph I. Emas
1224 Washington Avenue
Miami Beach, Florida 33139
(305) 531-1174
I think some of you have claimed to have already spoken to him about other matters, so it should not be a problem.
As far as all the questions re: name change, exchange change, merger completion, etc., I am sure all can be answered by the company's SEC Counsel
Joseph I. Emas
1224 Washington Avenue
Miami Beach, Florida 33139
(305) 531-1174
I think some of you have claimed to have already spoken to him about other matters, so it should not be a problem.
Last I checked, SOMETIMES, Nord Oil was still a registered corporation in good standing in Delaware, USA, and has not changed any filing address with the SEC.
You can be a foriegn company and hold resources in Russia.
LEEBRET, you make a good point which raises 2 questions.
You stated:
" Market cap is down under 80 million for no good reason. Just the oil in the ground is worth over 20 billion thats 20,000,000,000.00 with a B. With this market cap that makes the oil worth pennies per barrel."
Since everyone here wants something constructive from me, I am going to say something constructive.
Firstly, since so many of you seem to have a pretty good relationship with Gerald Parkin, why doesn't someone suggest that the company institute a share buy back plan. Any company in this situation would jump at the opportunity. It would raise the share price, thus raising the value of the company...and would be an excellent investment. There is absolutely no place they could invest that would give them a higher return on their money.
Another possibility might be for all you longs on this board and others to form a consortium and buy out the company. You are all here to make money; seem to collectively have the capital to do so just based on your investments in this company; most definitely must be business minded and motivated to increase your wealth; and most importantly of all, you have all done the DD and truly know the value of the company! I am sure that with the passion and dedication towards this company that you display on this board, and others on other boards, that raising the funds would not be difficult at all. I am not joking....I am sure there is enough money amongst all of you to easily raise the capital needed. Many of you seem to be business owners, which means you already collectively have the knowledge and skills, as well as working relationships with bankers.
Actually I don't believe you have rebutted anything. I guess we will have to agree to disagree.
It was even some of the longs here who responded to me days ago that the merger was not officially done.
Marcq.....
what did you rebut, and what do you consider a cockamamie
theory of mine?
BENZ, as far as where Mattossian is today, the best I can tell is that he is still the Chairman of Dairy Fresh up in Canada.
They don't seem to have made any money for awhile, in fact their 10QSB filed on this past June 22, put it this way:
"We have not been profitable since our inception in 2003. As of March 31, 2006, we had an accumulated deficit of approximately $2,388,000 primarily as a result of our start up expenses. We may never realize sufficient revenues from the sale of our products or be profitable. Each of the following factors, among others, may influence the timing and extent of our profitability, if any:"
He also seems to be associated with a company similar to Midland Baring Capital, and Monimpex.
As far as the suit against him, best I can tell is it has not even gone to trial yet, because the Canadian bankruptcy court is still handling the bankruptcy of the company he headed. At one time it was an extremely large multi multi million dollar company. The Federal Court in Philadelphia granted a stay until the bankruptcy was settled.
Now I get to ask a question....what did you mean by the 'old'
management team....seemed you were negative on them ?
SOMETIMES....
.....am I correct in taking from your message that Nord Oil either owns or controls a chain of gas stations and/or convenience stores?
It sure would be interesting if they posted that on the website and even provided pictures.
Many of you may not like me or the things I am uncovering....but none of this stuff has been made up!!
It is all out there in the public domain. All one has to do is take the blinders off !!!!
I will respond to the Dr. Matossian debacle very shortly.
I just wanted to share a chuckle with all of you who believe
that PR releases and SEC filings must be taken as the gospel truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth. And there seems to be quite a few of you here.
I stumbled across the following statement on the form 10KSB
filed with the SEC on 17-OCT-2005:
"On June 15, 2005, we completed our acquisition of Nord Oil Product, Inc., a Delaware corporation, pursuant to a Share Exchange Agreement. Nord Oil Product , LLC is engaged in wholesale realization of mineral oil and retail trade in food stuffs in Samara region and in Moscow, Russia."
Sounds to me like a grocery store in Russia selling mineral oil...sort of like a smaller WALGREEN'S I guess :)
VIC....
let me see if I have this correct. You stated:
"I held up to $1.50, could have made a huge profit but I held on. I beleive that the we will be dealing with a dollar stock in no time."
I understand that as meaning you did not sell at $1.50 a share, but are now rooting for $1/share in no time at all ?
Thanks for the link Saber...
because you actually have brought LESS credibility into Nord.
Take the time to read the whole document, and you will come to a gentleman by the name of Dr. Nicolas Mattossian, the supposed president of Great West Oil Corp. He was brought in as a consultant because of his 25 years of experience in the oil and gas industry...which is how the PR described him. Take about 20 minutes time and do a little research.
You will find that the same Dr. Mattossian, with the exact same credentials, also happens to be the Chairman of the board of a company named Dairy Fresh Farms. If you read his background there, there is no mention at all of Great Western Oil, but there are alot of other companies mentioned which he was associated with....one in particular being the Cedar Group.
Do just a little more research and you will find that Mr. Mattossian, as the president of Cedar Group, was sued by the shareholders of the company. And instead of trying to summarize the case for you I will let you read the allegations yoursel:
Stanford University Law School - Securities Class Action Clearinghouse
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA
________________________________________
JAMES B. SMITH, On Behalf Of Himself
and Others Similarly Situated
Plaintiffs,
v.
DOMINION BRIDGE CORP. (f/k/a CEDAR
GROUP, INC.), MICHEL L. MARENGERE and
NICOLAS MATOSSIAN
Defendants.
________________________________________
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
CIVIL ACTION
Case No. 96CV-7580
(filed Oct. 7, 1996)
COMPLAINT - CLASS ACTION
Plaintiff, complaining of the defendants, by his attorneys, alleges upon information and belief, except as to ¶8 herein, based on the investigation of counsel, except as to the allegations which are alleged on knowledge, as follows:
I. PRELIMINARY STATEMENT
1. For over one year, defendants have concealed from plaintiffs and the investing public the fact they have been continuously committing gross violations of the federal securities laws, including misleading the public as to the financial and business conditions of Cedar Group, Inc. ("Cedar" or the "Company" presently known as "Dominion Bridge Corp.") and its former, wholly-owned subsidiary, Dominion Bridge, Inc. ("Dominion"). Additionally, defendants have intentionally concealed from their shareholders the fact that defendants have been accused by a former executive of Dominion of committing the above violations. More specifically, these violations include misleading the public as to the actual quality and status of a number of contracts obtained by Dominion, as well as failing to disclose various inaccurate and misleading accounting practices. Furthermore, this same former executive also accused defendants of being responsible for Dominion's loss of over $40 million in contracts for fiscal 1996. (See Exhibit "A")
2. As discussed in detail below, while defendants were well aware of the problems that were adversely effecting [sic] Cedar and Dominion, defendants continued to disseminate numerous highly optimistic statements and financial information to the investment community. Yet at no time did defendants ever disclose that (i) Dominion's contracts were at risk of not solidifying or being canceled; (ii) the Company suffered from a lack of adequate accounting controls; (iii) the Company's financial results lacked credibility as a result of a number of inaccurate and misleading accounting practices; and (iv) the defendants were being accused of gross violations of the federal securities laws by a former executive of Dominion.
3. Defendants schemed to mislead their shareholders and the investment community as to the true current state of affairs and future outlook of Cedar and Dominion for the following reasons: (i) to ensure that contractors or strategic partners seeking to enter into contracts with Cedar and Dominion were unaware of the severe problems impacting Cedar and Dominion, including but not limited to Cedar's and Dominion's inability to post two necessary bond and/or line-of credit facility for its construction projects; (ii) protect and enhance their positions as officers and/or directors of Cedar and the substantial compensation and prestige they obtained thereby; and (iii) enhance the value of their personal holdings of Cedar common stock.
4. As a result of defendants' deceptive and illegal conduct, plaintiff and other class members purchased their Cedar shares at grossly inflated prices. Had plaintiff and the other class members been aware of the truth concerning Dominion's contracts, the inaccurate and misleading accounting practices of Dominion and Cedar and the true state of business affairs of Cedar and Dominion, they would not have purchased their Cedar shares or at least not at the inflated prices at which they purchased those shares.
Now I really don't want to have to form an opinion about Mr. Mattossian, but I will ask why Nord Oil, right at its birth, felt a need to present to the SEC and its investors a false and misleading document. I am not an attourney, but I would imagine it would be considered fraudulent. I would think that the SEC would frown on that type of behavior...LOL.
If any of you would like to discuss this with me, I would be happy to have that discussion....SABER? BENZ?
This whole company and board gets funnier each and every day :)
BENZ, no matter how many links I follow, I don't see any AUDITED financials for NORD/NWOG....which is one of the conditions of the merger.
Everybody seems to be hung up on North-West Oil Group
being Nord Oil. Wherever they direct me, it is quite clear that they are 2 seperate entities....one audited and one not.
All one has to do is look at the dates to see this.
All one has to do is look at the merger agreement. It is only that...an agreement. So how could it be that Nord Oil is already Nort-West Oil Group? THOSE AUDITED FINANCIALS ARE FOR NORT-WEST OIL GROUP. KEEP SCROLLING DOWN AND YOU WILL GET TO THE FINANCIALS OF NORD/NWOG....CLEARLY LABELED UNAUDITED. WHY IS EVERYONE AFRAID TO SEE THIS?
EVERONE HERE CANNOT BE UNAWARE THAT THERE IS A PRIVATELY HELD OIL COMPANY IN RUSSIA NAMED NORT-WEST OIL GROUP. THEY HAVE THEIR OWN WEBSITE WHICH DOES NOT MENTION NORD OIL AT ALL.
GDZ, there is absolutely no question that
Nort-West Oil Group exists. However, we are discussing
Nord Oil....that is the stock that you own shares
of. It is a company incorporated in the state of Delaware.
That was the point of my post. The two companies are being
discussed as if they are the same entity....they are not!!
I found it quite interesting that when I visited the
web site of North-West Oil Group that there is no mention
of Nord Oil at all, as well as no mention of any of the officers of Nord Oil which supposedly became officers of North-West. I find that strange since they seem to list just about every acquisition and joint venture they have entered into.
As far as the merger having taken place, who knows? All I pointed out was that one of the conditions of the so called merger was that Nord Oil (they are party 2 in the agreement)
was to provide audited financials. If one reads the papers filed, there is absolutely no doubt that party 1, North-West Oil Group provided audited financials. Upon observation, the financials for Nord Oil and/or NWOG (call it what you will) are clearly labelled UNAUDITED....and I am very curious as to why someone like BRENTJANICE is trying to confuse the issue, and mislead the board.
Why all the lies and deception surrounding
this stock and it's posters?
BRENTJANICE, all I did was follow your link and click on the 8K report that you pointed me too. You can say whatever you like, but anyone with half a brain can look at that filing and see that all the financials for North-West Oil Group are audited.
However, ABSOLUTELY NO FINANCIALS FOR NORD OIL OR NWOG ARE AUDITED. I AM STARTING TO UNDERSTAND WHY THE NAME CHANGE AND NEW SYMBOL TO NWOG....I THINK IT IS BEING PROPOSED TO MURKY THE WATERS, AND CONFUSE PEOPLE INTO THINKING THAT NORD OIL AND NORTH-WEST OIL GROUP ARE ONE AND THE SAME. THAT HOWEVER IS NOT THE CASE. NORD OIL IS A SEPERATE COMPANY AND YOU ABSOLUTELY KNOW THAT. BUT BY CONSTANTLY INTERCHANGING THE TWO, THERE IS A HOPE THAT SOONER OR LATER YOUR READER WILL THINK THEY ARE ONE AND THE SAME....AND IT APPEARS IT MAY BE WORKING, AS I SEE POSTS IN WHICH THE TWO ARE INTERCHANGED.
AGAIN....WHY THE DECEPTION ? AND TO THINK I ONLY STUMBLED ONTO THIS BOARD BECAUSE I ONLY CORRECTED A POST IN POINTING OUT THAT THE SEC HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH SYMBOL CHANGES !!!
In message # 14618, PRIME SABER suggested putting me on ignore because I had not done DD. Well now I have, Mr Saber, and I will definitely state that you cannot show myself, nor anyone else, any audited financials for Nord Oil. There are an abundance for North-West Oil Group, but absolutely none of Nord Oils financials are audited.....and I dare say that one of the conditions of the 'supposed' merger happens to be Nord Oil providing audited financials. I think many of you may be confusing Nord Oil with North-West Oil Group. They are presently 2 distinct entities.
As far as saying that Nord Oil has "has audited reserves", that happens to be one of the most ridiculous statements I have ever heard anyone who invests in stock ever make.
Hello again all,
.....since I seemed to create such a stir the other night, I thought I would check to see what all the fuss was about. I think I figured out what the hullabaloo was all about. There seems to be a battle going on about whether or not this is a legitimate stock or a scam stock....am I correct? And it further seems that each group feels a need to defend their position....also correct?
With Pinksheet stocks this is almost always a consideration...and over the years I have developed a pretty good system for differentiating the two. It wasn't nearly as accurate as it is today....and I have the proverbial stock certificates hanging on the wall to remind me...LOL. Oddly enough, it doesn't require reading balance sheets or spending hours upon hours reading financial statements, etc. All it is, is a series of questions I ask of myself, together with some observations, and then I see what my answers are. Positive answers and observations on one side of the page, negative on the other. Quite simple actually, provided you develop good questions to ask and good things to look for...takes emotion out of the question.
In any event, I decided to see how this Nord Oil stacked up, so I put it to my test,,,,and can honestly say I would have walked away from this stock. There are far many more to look at that would be more positive.
Now I would like to respond to some things which I read concerning my post the other night.
Firstly, I thought I made it absolutely clear that that I was just making a statement of fact. Before that night, I had never heard of Nord Oil, North-West Oil Group, NWOG....so I did not tailor my question to the SEC regarding any stock....it was a general question that I thought I knew the answer to, and just wanted confirmation before I opened my mouth.
Secondly, I spent thirty three years as a firefighter in NYC...so don't even think about whether I have the 'cahones'
to be upfront with what I say...LOL
And thirdly, and this I consider most sad, is the statement that "no one would be correcting something if they didn't have a vested interest or motive".....or words to that effect. What makes this especially sad is the fact that this was said by a TEACHER. My God man, don't you think our children deserve a little better attitude from one who is supposed to "teach". Do you have to question a student's motive before you let him answer a qustion? Or wonder why he took the time to correct something another student got wrong when no one asked? God help our society with too many of your kind of "teacher"
I ended up writing far more than I expected....for that I apologize. But then again, no one forced you to read all of it...:)
Somehow, without knowing it
I seemed to have disturbed a hornets nest. I reiterate, I was only correcting fact....not offering any opinion at all.
It would seem that had someone BrentJanice knew and deemed credible had stated that 3 plus 2 equals 4 and someone had corrected him by saying it actually equalled 5, BrentJanice would not want to acknowledge that 5 was factually correct.
It was my assumption that message boards were a gathering place to share knowledge. I am totally baffled as to why BrentJanice states that he will no longer have the time for someone who merely brought a fact, a true and irrefutable fact, to the attention of the board. I believe his actual words were that he would not "waste his time" with someone who had contradicted his friend.
It would seem to me that blind faith has its place....but it has absolutely no place in the world of investing!!!!
Sorry Brent if I raised...
red flags for you. I thought I was pretty clear in stating that I just wanted to check my knowledge with the SEC regarding symbol changes. I did not contact them regarding Nord Oil. The only reason I registered and posted today is that I saw a blatantly false and erroneous statement of fact, and wanted to point it out.
It would appear I may have stepped on someones' toes who may have an agenda. As an old investor, I have experienced a myriad of different circumstances and only try to impart my knowledge to those who may not know the ins and outs of the market and its workings. I will never ever offer my opinions regarding different securities...but if I see mistaken facts I will correct them.
With all due respect to cm3i,
there must be some mistake in his communication with Gerald Parkin. According to him, Parkin blamed the delay in acquiring the new symbol to the SEC needing more information, etc.
In actuality, the SEC has absolutely no role in issuing a new symbol. In order to make sure my information was correct, I inquired of the SEC, and this is the response I recieved:
Printable View This message is not flagged. [ Flag Message - Mark as Unread ]
Date: Wed, 19 Jul 2006 15:56:25 -0400 (EDT)
From: "SEC Help" <help@sec.gov> Add to Address Book Add Mobile Alert
To: "xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: SEC Response - File HO1164943
Dear Mr. xxxxxxxxxx Thank you for contacting the SEC.
The SEC does not issue stock symbols. Therefore, unless the company
has reported a symbol change in its SEC filings, we will not have the
information. I note that not all pink sheet securities are SEC reporting
companies. If you have not done so already, you may want to check the
Pinksheets' website, www.pinksheets.com for any information that it
may have about the name change.
Sincerely,
ANN H SULZBERG
U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission
100 F St, NE
Washington, DC 20549-0213
(202)551-6308