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.
From what I saw it was said he sent them partials and represented them to be from the afore mentioned documents.
There have been so many thousands of posts that I can't tell you which ones contained the partial documents. I'm not sure but I believe one from Terry, janice and I believe maybe one from MOMO (I'm not sure about who posted them) all showed the partial document with the signature.
The problem is why was only a portion of the document presented as evidence if the whole document existed? Think about that! If it was real it could have eliminated a lot of questions!
Whether or not the signatures were real was also in dispute---but what isn't with SRGE!
MOMO supposedly had copies of the signed confidentiality agreement that he circulated to members of his "sit" group. He also sent at least a partial copy of an agreement that showed maracosas (?) signature to Terry to try and prove he was right about Kinross and Terry was wrong. If the copies were real it would be illegal for MOMO to have them as that would be insider information. If the copies were fake or only partials of some other document, then MOMO would be guilty of trying to influence the share price with fake documents. Either way it would be a problem not a solution!
You haven't seen the numerous posts that show only the corner of the supposed agreement offered as proof that one exists. Evidently you have missed a few posts.
Unfortunately most of the manipulation is being orchestrated by a few longs with positions they need to either dump or protect. Understandable except for those hoping to con others. They deserve what they get here.
I have no shares and have never shorted (couldn't afford to and don't like that game)
After being in a stock that was halted though I would like to see those such as MOMO take a very hard fall. I have read thousands of post here and hope some get out with a portion of their money. Those that bait others to hold I hope lose it all.
A little. It hasn't been suspended yet. LOL I own it but DAMN. The company isn't doing any of us any favors that's for sure.
How appropriate that you posted your great alert in RED!
too funny!
AN OUTSIDERS OPINION.
The only thing I say is be careful!!!
Longs--everyone wants to believe in their companies--nothing wrong with that.
From the outside---why is all the "evidence" presented in such a poor way? Corners of documents when the entire page could easily be shown.
Many "highlight" the disclaimer by Kinross but don't think twice about the extensive disclaimer by MOMO or the one by Sierra that says for entertainment purposes.
Why in the world would MOMO suggest pulling certs--to me that's crazy and a huge RED flag!
Why the dividend payment? As desperate as some say the "shorts" are, there seems to be a few longs that are equally so. Personally I believe a lot of stock needs to be unloaded yet by insiders. If the dividend wasn't paid those insiders would have had no chance. Just look at the change in attitude some of the longs were having when the dividend was pulled.
There will be a limited market on the greys. Take advantage of it!
Don't completely discredit either side---but don't follow blindly because of what you want to happen!
I went through this with ZLUS and may again with another stock. Many of the same players involved.
Even Garyst in his "honesty" says he's been through this many times.Wow would I hate to admit that!
KEEP THE BLINDERS OFF BOTH WAYS! JMO
It's ok. In his own words he has his $1200 an hour lawyers working on it. LOL
Palo-- what don't you understand? Any drilling reports must be verified by an independent third party to have any validity at all. If the company reports it it means absolutely nothing!
Even when reserves are proven, the cost of mining those reserves has to be less than the amount recovered. I AM in another mining stock and I can tell you things are never as they seem!
The post this is replying to is spam. Mods please remove it.
Anvil
Since you are one that always asks for facts and proof, maybe you can tell everyone how you know why he is being held in Florida?
Quote
This is Robert Louis Cotton, a convicted felon, who obviously is being detained in Florida for further grilling on other crimes.
If it is so obvious, I assume you have proof or a link.
You are just throwing out a statement of which only a part can be proven.(the conviction which is not disputed)
How about you try and post by the same rules you demand?
A quote from Vincal.
Quote--
For those who wonder about percentages lsot lately. from .02 to .015 is a 75% loss, then .015 to .0125 is an almsot %84 oercent loss, then go on, and on, and you see that not only is %100 percent loss possible but the loss percentages are i nteh thousands
There is NOTHING in this post that is correct and anyone that would listen to a poster using examples like this -- well good luck.
First of all, a drop from .02 to .015 is 25% not 75% as stated.
A drop from .015 to .0125 is a 16.7% drop not 84% as stated. You're quoting the percentage remaining, not the percent lost.
Most importantly, the actual drop represented from .02 to .0125 is actually a 37.5% drop instead of 159% as stated. To figure the percentage lost always use the beginning number and the current number. You don't add the steps in between!
Just so you can understand Vincal. Using your math, if a person invested $100, a 5000% loss like you stated would mean you would lose $5000.
Just how would that work? Would your broker come to your house and ask for $4900?
I have- why don't you show me how I am wrong.
Businesses that are illegal are run all the time. It just depends on who is getting their cut. If there is enough money to be made, both states and feds allow them to continue.
Perfect example is all the class II gaming that goes on in every licensed liquor establishment in Wisconsin. It is completely illegal because it competes with Indian gaming compacts. The state (under former Governor Tommy Thompson) changed the laws to make it a misdemeanor instead of a felony. Thompson did it because his brother was being prosecuted for running an illegal gambling enterprise.
With few exceptions both the state and the feds look the other way now as long as they get their cut. They make a ton of money off of it. The tribes allow it to happen as long as they are not bothered running their casinos.
Vincal-- you have absolutely no concept of how the percentages for shorting work. I remember you stating a 5000% drop I believe it was.
The fact is a stock at any price can't drop more than 100%! doesn't matter if it's .03 or 10.00. It has to drop to zero to reach 100%.
Only a price rise can be a multiple!
Followed a number of your stocks- If you're willing pm me an email I'd like to ask you a few questions
I couldn't help but think of you when I read the rest of the email.
How long do you think that six month agreement will last now?
Couldn't resist LOL
We all know you are just dieing to dig up some negative dirt regarding the GEO Tech Lawsuit.
What have you come up with?
Even in that reference you again don't know what you are talking about at all. Any DD at all and you would know from my posts that I don't at this time own any stock in this company.
I do believe there is incredible potential here and regardless of your opinion about Riggs (as biased as you are) the fact is you can only guess about the future.
Some here have invested, some here are following the technology, (even if it may eventually take us in another direction) most enjoy sharing ideas pro and con.
You have made your feelings about Riggs known and you may be completely right--- only time will tell. To spout the Altounian crap over and over reminds me more of the third graders I work with.
quote "to me the company you keep tells me all i want to know "
First of all you have no idea what company I keep. In fact the company I keep referencing is one of the most respected out there. Maybe you are familiar with the equipment that they make that makes the lives of all deaf people much more fulfilling. Telecommunication devices for the deaf (TTDYs)that have enriched their lives. The CEO was just given an honorary doctorate by the UW Wisconsin last year during commencement ceremonies for all he has done.
The company I keep is just fine thank you!
By the way after 3000 posts you have no company at all so what the hell are you talking about?
Janice- I don't believe the groups that take advantage of the things you cite represent the majority of investors at all.
That's actually not true at all. The technology used in our markets has indeed changed enormously over the last 15 years or so. That's made it possible for you to pay $7.99 commissions, rather than hundreds of dollars a shot. It's made it possible for you to get realtime quotes and Level II. And so on. Without all that, very, very few retail people would be anything but investors holding blue chips or mutual funds.
to me the majority of investors are those that have 401ks or retirement funds invested. They work everyday and don't sit at a computer and watch level II or trade in and out of the market every day or even every week or month.
The things you cite have created a whole new class of traders that make more frequent trades. Anyone has to admit that those trade that go up also go down. For everyone that makes money others lose. Which class does what do you think?
The long term holders have historically been the support for the market. Take away that support and we see what happens with every crash that is exaggerated by the very same buying and selling you point out. It is also why all the new regulations that each have their glitches that need to be worked out exist.
It's the brokers and the MMs along with the minority of large investors that benefit from the high volume more than anyone else
(the point I was making) They benefit due to market liquidity and volume. The old theory that they don't care if the market is rising or falling as long as it moves. The same principal as Vegas--- they don't care who wins or loses they get 10% of the action.
Some of the "Riggs Strategy" IMO is very good. Some we just have to live with. He has spent a lot of time and money making contacts in different countries trying to find various niches for OIL's technology.
The more people you meet the more ideas and applications will be opened up. It takes these type of meetings to get new thoughts and open up new opportunities.
Things that may seem simple could take years to bring to fruition due to the different parties that need to be brought together to make advancements. Each party has their own time table and agenda. Sometimes they fit while other times they go nowhere. If they aren't explored at all they have no chance of going anywhere.
In a publicly traded start up dilution is the necessary evil of raising money to operate. If you think dilution is not a normal course of business for a start up then there is really no reason to converse.
I believe you mention in one of your posts the money Riggs spends flying around the world. i know what it did for the company I previously mentioned as they have offices in multiple countries overseas. Any contact or partnership may seem trivial in the beginning. at a later date any one of those contacts may be the sole reason a company continues to exist or better yet thrive.
Maybe you can offer an idea as to how he should be making all the contacts in multiple countries some other way. Seems to me that face to face meetings could prove to be very beneficial in the long run.
I tracked the record of Rodmen & Renshaw who does private placement for a couple of years. To me they were the definition of market manipulation as press releases were timed to allow stock selling. They are considered a very legitimate company for raising capital----why is that?
I've followed this company for about 3 years now. I won't really question anything for about two more. To me 5 years is a good amount of time to form a strong opinion about whether a company is legitimate in their business practices.
Janice - the problem is that not everyone believes every increase in technology represents "progress"
Unfortunately for the masses much of the technology is only looked at it that way by those that can take advantage of it. The general investing public is not included in that group.
As you know from much of what you write about, the criminal element is usually the second group to take advantage while regulators play catch up.
The first group to take advantage are the insiders in the trading loop along with those in Washington. If they weren't able to take advantage it would never happen in the first place. IMO
I don't always agree with some of your posts but this one was well put LOL
Homeland- you actually have a great view of the company and possibly the technology as well. When I post I usually always state that I too have no current stake in OOIL. I am always offered the opportunity to buy any of the private placements that take place. As of yet I have never done so.
The only problem I have with diligizer is that it is very easy to criticize any company at almost any stage. Hell there are plenty of people that do the same to apple stock even when it was much lower than it is now.
I have been on the inside of a company when it has gone from basement start up to 300+ million and is now the largest employer in the UW research park with well over 1000 employees.
The way that CEO (the owner as they decided to stay private) ran the company was a joke at times. I can't even discuss things that were done along the way during growth phases.
What makes a CEO qualified is the fact that they are doing it instead of looking in from the sideline telling everyone how things should be done.
Like you I watch this one always, waiting to see what will happen. I was turned on to this technology by very qualified scientists at UW Madison. Some very respected people.
Will ooil make it successful? Who knows. Time will answer many questions.
Why is it that the nay sayers always want to bring up madoff as if that backs up their point?
That would be no different than saying Steve Jobs or Bill gates started with ideas and drive and now their companies are worth Billions. What would that have to do with OOIL?
The fact is you are speculating as to what will happen just as the people that are invested here are doing. Admit it or not this entire industry is still in the infancy stages. Will it ever make it out?
Only time and advancements will tell.
Your DD just needs to get better LOL.
I've seen a number of crooked CEO's charged. Most try posting right away to keep the illusion going because they have nothing else. Those companies all seem to be gone rather quickly after that.
As some have posted here he may be best off letting the legal aspects of his life play out so he can speak with some certainty about the future.
Some companies were recently halted due to unsupported PRs and false information. CWRN has not suffered that fate (as of yet)and has seemingly ended any PRs for the sake of offering a PR. I don't think they can afford to issue any more PRs that don't happen. The SEC seems to be pretty active these days.
It's tough to wait but I will be doing so. In two weeks I will also be adding for those that want to take their shot at another long.
Everyone has had this or that happen at any given time, but there is no way you can tell me when any of those individual events took place in my account or that I could in yours. Unless you have information as to what a particular M&M is doing at any given time all I was saying is that you are guessing as to what was happening this particular time.
If you read what Janice wrote her comment said she would have no way of knowing what was happening with that particular trade. She was commenting about painting the tape.
You seemed to be saying you could tell what was happening on that trade. (Quote "more than likely")
I was simply making the analogy that you were doing exactly the same thing you call so many others out on and that is simply making no more than a guess and representing it as something you more than likely knew happened.
Educate me if you will. Why is your comment any more than a complete guess in this particular situation?
TIA
Just wanted to see how you would answer and I appreciate that you did. (even if it was sugar coated a little lol)
My opinion is ANY trade up or down within the last half hour done at a transaction loss is an attempt to paint. JMO
Janice- aren't you the one who mentioned painting the tape was illegal?
How about commenting on a 400 share sell at the end of the day to drop the price 4 ticks?
I'll let you calculate the amount recovered from that sale. 400x .0009 With commission figured in that has to be a net loss.
As long as you like to point out right AND wrong I'd like your opinion on such trades.
Maybe that is the reason why shipments we expected to happen didn't.
At any rate any future moves in the price of CWRN stock will only happen as demand in the future creates a need for more imports.
For that reason the argument I have made becomes much more important. The markets are always forward looking once events of the past have been factored in.
What will happen if banks and the financial industry demand that those stocks of steel that were being represented need to be produced? I'm pretty sure BAO Steel has the ability to make sure those things can happen.
As you know we are on opposite sides of the CWRN argument, at least for now. The problem with the article you have provided is that it actually supports the need for more steel. Why you ask?
If steel stocks in warehouses are not what they have been represented to be, then as demand picks up, the backlog of available steel will be less than thought. To fill that demand more steel will be needed sooner. Demand for ore to make that steel will cause a rise in price and a need to import more ore. The only thing in question is where that ore will come from.
The part of the question that is in doubt is how will the financial sector absorb the hit non existent inventory will cause.
As many on this board know (through your support for KCG) the financial sector seems to handle crisis very well using whatever actions they need to support each other.
Rocket -- you know I'm long here, but didn't we hear the same thing for September?
I agree they are CWRN loads. I believe we have a partnership with GEO Tech. To me that is a good thing! Maybe they have the leverage needed to keep things moving. I really think we could have a good thing here. I just think we have a smaller percentage than what we were hoping.
I still think it will be valued way above where we are right now!
I for one wouldn't care if GEO Tech had a percentage interest in this project. At least it appears that they may be one of the reasons that things are actually happening.
For long term shareholders even having a half share if run right would give multiple returns from current price levels. Getting a company as a partner that shows any of the transparency that Geo Tech now appears to be showing would be a good thing if we own anything at all.
I agree that it can't become a contract by default. The problem becomes GEOs problem in my opinion if they did not read the signed contract until a later date.
I'm just guessing, but the way it looks to me is that CWRN is now arguing the same point you are making--- the fact is there is no enforceable contract at all. Neither side holds both ends of a contract that reads the same. Legal counsel for GEO Tech should have been all over this IMO. It's a pretty significant contract to let slip through the cracks.
You are right that they are holding copies of an agreement. The problem is they both hold those copies and have for a while. There is no way to argue on GEOs part that they did not know the copy they have is different from the original this late in the game. CWRN can simply point out they sent the document to GEO and didn't hear back on the changes.
If Bob created a loophole intentionally it sucks IMO. The problem is GEO may have run their business as poorly as Bob has been doing
Bob will have burned numerous bridges, but my bet is he was hoping to have generated so much revenue by the time things caught up with him that he wouldn't need those bridges.
Seems he couldn't make things happen the way he had hoped----or did he?