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.
jas did you delete my post?
Eugene why don't you post on IHub anymore?
Is it the same reason you don't post on Raging Bull? LOL
Did management shut you up, or did you finally see the light -- the light at the end of the tunnel that is a freight train coming straight at you?
I know it's not easy for you, Eugene, to realize that we've been right all along, but, hey, I'm glad that no matter how long it took that you are finally on our side.
Of course, Mike, we share your excitement.
That's why johnson no longer posts here or on RB...he is simply too overcome with excitement to do anything but drool with pleasure that comes from thinking about how rich he's going to be. LOL
Jas, how do you feel getting paid $250K for a $40 million dollar business?
As for the amendents to the EEV and Gulftex and all the rest it makes my head ache to read such crap...but I suppose that's the idea.
What's your take on the substance of this filing?
My apologies. I thought it said 2002.
No, I'm not good at that.
Why don't you explain yourself instead of making some kind of portentous statement rife with meaning.
I'm not asking you to waste your time.
You post this out of the blue. It's a couple of years old. I'm just asking what the relevance is...really.
I'd like to understand what your concern is; what you're trying to communicate.
What does that mean?
In what way am I being a pain?
I simply asked you what the significance is to your post. I want to understand what you are trying to say. What's wrong with that?
Give me break already, Jas. I'm being a good citizen here.
And your point is...?
Willy you responded to what George Russell told you to do.
You responded to what Bill Tuorto told you to do.
I'm sure you've responded to what many of your payors tell you to do because your mouth doesn't move unless you're paid to do so.
You're not fooling anyone, and I should be the last person you'd expect to believe you when you say that.
If my posts aren't worth responding to...don't respond.
Mike, looks like Johnson and Willy have been told
to stop posting.
Or maybe they've been reassigned to monitor the MM lineup.
Mike, are the shares down because a Wells Notice may be served on management?
I believe in the corporate death penalty, don't you?
johnson, based on your last PM, it would appear that you have a problem.
Okay, Wally, I'll humor...not that you would concede anything because you are paid by management to make your impotent attempts to confute me in what I say...more money wasted by management IMO.
Okay, it made sense at the time, to Keith, because Wally Gifford Mabie and Jack Arnold had left the company for dead.
The idea behind the preferreds was to show that management would achieve certain goals and if they were not met then shareholders would get something for hanging in with the company..i.e. paid for their good faith.
It also showed that Keith intended to deliver on increasing shareholder value and if he failed at least shareholders would get more equity and increase their ownership stake. If he succeeded, then shareholders have price appreciation for their time and investment.
The preferreds were issued to reinstate credibility at a time when credibility was severely lacking. When Keith and the Board decided to issue the preferreds shareholders like it, and it added to the positive momentum of the company's turnaround being on track and progressing toward success.
That's why at the time it made sense in proving that Keith was serious about rehabilitating CVIA as a real company and investment.
YOU ARE FACTUALLY INCORRECT BECAUSE issuing the preferreds did not create dilution.
You are factually incorrect in this statement...try again.
You speak but you say nothing.
Try again...as the predicate for your posting is missing. What's the basis for your saying "...the methods used to issue them were misleading?"
What methods?
What was misleading about these methods?
Mays didn't convert them because management figured out a better way for them to create the dilution they needed at the point in time when they took over.
Their goal was to get control of the stock float and issue Decrees of Consent and run this company by fiat. Get it Hal?
I guessing Mays looked at the preferreds, saw the convert ratio and thought it would be a quick way to create the dilution he wanted, but for whatever reasons of mechanics and convenience decided not to issue the remaining preferreds into friendly buyers' hands, and instead decided to over dilute the commons.
And, NO, I was not a consultant to Keith or anyone at CVIA about the preferreds. It was strictly one of Keith's ideas, and at the time made sense in order to prove that he was serious about rehabilitating CVIA as a real company and investment.
For those who have been asking, the server process information for anyone interested is the following, i.e. send all legal actions/complaints to Richard Tuorto (see below):
Office of the South Carolina Secretary of State
Business Filings Division
Information for: CORPORATE VISION, INC. Check Charities Database
Note*** This online database was last updated on 01/09/2004 see our Disclaimer
DOMESTIC / FOREIGN: Foreign
STATUS: Good Standing
STATE OF INCORPORATION / ORGANIZATION: OKLAHOMA
For Profit
------------
REGISTERED AGENT INFORMATION
REGISTERED AGENT NAME: RICHARD TUORTO
ADDRESS: 3 BROAD ST
CITY: CHARLESTON
STATE: SC
ZIP: 29401 0000
SECOND ADDRESS: STE 300
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
FILE DATE: 07/18/2002
EFFECTIVE DATE: 07/18/2002
DISSOLVED DATE:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
CORPORATION HISTORY RECORDS
Code File Date Comment Document
AUTHORITY(FOREIGN)) 07/18/2002 AUTHORITY IMAGE
I was looking through my CVIA files today and saw this:
3/26/01:
Gary Mays will convert preferreds now.
----------
I wonder why Gary changed his mind.
------------
Management malefactors refusing to convert the preferreds as called for by Board Resolution continues to keep the clock ticking on the corporate death penalty being delivered to this company.
Note to management: Please continue being so stupid.
Hey, johnson...how soon before we see double digits?
How's Jizzco doing?
Where's the beef? Does CVIA have 'mad cow' disease of the corporate self??????
It is just a matter of time before the corporate death penalty is dealt to management.
The preferred shares better get issued soon. Bill Tuorto knows the law and he better start complying with NOW!!!!!!!!
Your concern should be management's lack of performance.
You should be calling for their corporate hides, but instead you wrangle about meaningless things...and you tell me to get a grip. LOL
BTW, what are you holding onto besides your misplaced expectations about CVIA? Yeah, you keep gripping onto your meaningless expectations...that'll keep you upright. LOL
I don't know what you're talking about.
You are repeating your stupid question...why?
This is a stupid post.
Avoiding my question with this kind of response does not change the reality of management's blighted performance; case closed.
So what?
If management was building real shareholder value creeps like the one you cite wouldn't be able to manipulate CVIA.
All you're doing in saying this is agreeing with many of here who say management is toxic and an enemy of shareholders, a destroyer of shareholder value.
How do you know management wasn't working with Rhino to line their own pockets?
You don't need to be on I Hub to make money on your little investment. So, once again, you invalidate your own reasoning about why you do the things you do.
This Raging Bull thing you keep referring to; what's that?
EJ, saying that you're here implies that you are being paid to be here...as here is this website.
Surely this isn't what you mean is it?
"As far me, I am not here to win a popularity contest with
bashers and slammers."
What ARE you here to do?
ANGLR, I'd like to see the trading slips for all these shares that these "brayers" for management claim to have bought.
I don't believe they bought the shares, or if they did it was with a certain understanding from management.
\JMO
All shareholders, big or small, are EQUAL in the eyes of the law.
johnson, you've fallen and you can't get up...you just don't realize it yet.
You've said this before.
That's fine by me. Do you have any proof that this is so? How do you know? Which bank was it?
One other thing that Keith told me about current management:
To paraphrase: 'They told me, Jim, that they think they can get the stock up to $3...I'll be selling when it hits $1..."
Management didn't even get close did they?
I STAND by what I said, Eugene, while you will FALL by what you said.
KAA had no lieutenants. That was a big problem.
What he had was Ray Hall, Treiber and the part time CFO who were nothing but greedy creeps, and KAA paid them off by taking their deals...Hall the baldness company...Treiber his gold mine debacle -- while Keith did his DD on oil plays and companies to put into his own pocket at the shareholders' expense.
When Anderson came to New York he flew first class and flirted with the stewardesses...so he told me...at our expense.
I hate the creep.
As far as your enthusiasm for new management your trust is misplaced and your assertion that they have added something while former management added nothing doesn't hold up.
This management has done nothing but given the shareholders dilution on bogus deals, while at least Anderson got the stock price up.
I don't know who you really are johnson, but if you are some regular guy down in Arkansas, then you would do well to follow my advice and not buy any more shares until managagement does something that justifies your investing in their perfomance.
Until then, as T. Boone Pickens used to say: "It's all just conversation."
JMO
Here, here, Mike!!!!!!
Management is King...Kong. :)
John, just to be precise about what I way saying, I think I used the expression "meaningful profits." Not trying to split hairs with you, but the issue is is the amount of shares issued justified by the operating profits/net profits that Stony's/BRight generated?
The answer for me is NO.
And further to that point, I believe that management knew this in advance and went ahead with the deal because buying a "crappy" company fits their motis operandi and is exactly the kind of business they wanted to buy in order to justify their business approach which allows for them to issue unwarranted shares that can be utilized for their singular purposes that benefit management/other insiders and not shareholders. JMO
Think about John, would you run a business like this...make the same kind of business decisions management has?
I wouldn't.