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.
Nice post other then this part is very wrong, "paying to have all the paperwork brought up to date is a waste of money." The bottom line is Megas needs to get off his but and get up to date with all SEC filings while getting the 15c2-11 done also. This has been going round and round, but people still don't get it!!!
NO FILINGS, NO TRADING as its just an excuse for the DTCC and SEC to keep the stalemate alive!!!
It is Megas's fiduciary duty to keep shareholders informed and keep current with filings, plus do what it takes to keep the BCIT running smoothly, while so far non of this has been accomplished in the past several years!!! And, yes CEOs do work for the shareholders. Just ask the guy who got fired from GM!!!
Where are the filings and 15c2-11 Megas???
Get off your but and get to work Megas!!!
Did you forget you work for the shareholders???
I doubt you will ever see any verifiable answer in writing with links provided, as what is being said goes totally against the advents that are un-folding daily!!!
What proof do you have that the SFC, SEC, DTCC or FINRA has said anything in regards BCIT to you or anyone else in privet???
Sorry I have never spoke to any of your allies Megas, Stewie, Pino or Uselton.
"So what was your source??..Megas/Stewie/Pino/Uselton maybe???"
I'm confident BCIT is very close to trading with many anxious to get going and a select few being very nervous to the point of panic!!!
All you have stated below has been done in October of 2006 as posted in the sticky notes, but some are just not willing admit they are wrong to the extent of posting false information!!!
"Before trading can resume for OTC stocks, SEC regulations require a broker-dealer to review information about a company before publishing a quote. If a broker-dealer does not have confidence that a company's financial statements are current and accurate, especially in light of the questions raised by the SEC, then a broker-dealer may not publish a quote for the company's stock."
Posted in the sticky notes!!!
After settling the Pino civil action in January 2006, the company continued its process of regaining “current status” with its financial filings at the SEC. It was current with financial filings by July 2006 and then submitted its form 15c2-11 to NASDAQ for relisting on the OTCBB exchange. After going back and forth with NASDAQ for comments and answers, in October 2006, the 15c2-11 was accepted and the company was relisted on the OTCBB exchange and Legacy Trading was selected as the sponsoring market maker to furnish quoting on the exchange. BCIT should have started trading normally again at this time.
With all the legal action and possible trading about to happen with BCIT, I would be very leary of posting false information.
Well said!!!
I had the same thoughts when Knight was brought up. Knight is one of the biggest scam TAs out there, but I guess as usual while spinning away that was over looked!!!
It does not matter who they picked for their TA as long as they are registered and what was posted is false information!!!
Besides, as far as night being the largest of the companies that trade pink sheets, BCIT is an OTCBB company.
You are missing the point!!!
There was no charges when Megas hired them and your posting as if Megas knew about the problem.
As usual you conveniently leave out they where TA for Megas long before this happened!!!
THIS WEEK IN SECURITIES LITIGATION (August 7, 2009)
http://www.secactions.com/?p=1377
Unless your just here to post fantasies, you might want to get the facts strait.
The SEC cleared BCIT to trade when Megas filed the 12c2-11, had a TA and was current in filings back in 2006 and some shares traded at .15!!!
Its all right here: http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=40568399
After settling the Pino civil action in January 2006, the company continued its process of regaining “current status” with its financial filings at the SEC. It was current with financial filings by July 2006 and then submitted its form 15c2-11 to NASDAQ for relisting on the OTCBB exchange. After going back and forth with NASDAQ for comments and answers, in October 2006, the 15c2-11 was accepted and the company was relisted on the OTCBB exchange and Legacy Trading was selected as the sponsoring market maker to furnish quoting on the exchange. BCIT should have started trading normally again at this time.
"This has NOT happened and most likely never will."
Should Investors Bite on BlackRock's New PPIP Fund?
By Rachel Haig
On Wednesday July 29, 2009, 3:00 pm EDT
Buzz up! 0 Print
On Friday, BlackRock announced plans to allow individuals to invest in the Public-Private Investment Program, or PPIP, which aims to remove toxic assets from banks' balance sheets. BlackRock plans to launch a closed-end fund called BlackRock Legacy Securities Public-Private Trust, which it hopes will trade on the New York Stock Exchange.
According to the prospectus, the fund's objective is to "generate attractive returns for shareholders through long-term opportunistic investments in assets eligible for purchase under the PPIP." The fund will invest primarily in commercial and residential mortgage-backed securities, which must have been issued before 2009 and originally rated AAA or equivalent by at least two agencies. Current ratings are not a limitation, and may be lower.
Should Investors Bite?
According to Morningstar mutual fund analyst Michael Herbst, investors should only consider this fund if they have a long time horizon and are willing to accept the possibility of continued havoc in the mortgage market. He emphasizes that the key risks of mortgage-backed securities still exist. While PPIP is designed to improve markets and bring prices back in line, success is not guaranteed. Investors should be willing to hold onto securities until prices come back in line, which our analysts think could take anywhere from three to nine years. The worst-case scenario--additional mortgage defaults--is a possibility, but BlackRock has shown formidable expertise in selecting these types of securities, and we think the risk of widespread default is low. Investors should also keep in mind that this is a closed-end fund, and the shares may trade below the fund's net asset value even if the underlying holdings gain.
Bottom line: This is a relatively risky investment. While we think the risk of complete default is relatively low, investors must be willing to wait a potentially long time for rewards, and the fund should be used as a satellite holding rather than as a core part of a portfolio.
How It Works
U.S. Treasury involvement will create leverage that could be either beneficial or detrimental to investors, as it would magnify both gains and losses. Here's how this leverage would work:
The BlackRock Legacy Securities Public-Private Trust (the closed-end fund--also referred to as "The Trust") would invest a slice of assets in BlackRock's Public-Private Investment Fund (PPIF or "The LP"), which is a limited partnership private-equity vehicle not accessible to retail investors. The U.S. Treasury will match the amount of money BlackRock raises for the PPIF one-to-one. For example, if BlackRock raises $500 million, the Treasury would invest $500 million--this money is all considered and referred to as "equity capital," and it is all within the LP, or PPIF.
In addition, the PPIF will borrow up to 1/3 of its assets "immediately after giving effect to the borrowing" via the Treasury Debt Financing program. So, if the PPIF then holds $1 billion in equity capital, it will borrow $500 million, resulting in $1.5 billion in the PPIF ($500 million being 1/3 of $1.5 billion).
The closed-end fund itself (The Trust) can only borrow up to 5% of assets to make distributions, according to its prospectus, and the Treasury will not be investing directly in the closed-end fund, but the closed-end fund gives investors indirect exposure to the leverage in PPIF.
Assuming the closed-end fund invests 40% of its assets in PPIF (the exact amount has not yet been established), the economic effect on or exposure to an investor in the closed-end fund would work like this:
$1000 * 40% = $400 invested indirectly in PPIF $400 matched 1:1 by Treasury = $800 $800 + $400 of PPIF borrowing from Treasury = $1200 $1200 + the remaining $600 of the closed end investor's money = $1800
Each $1 invested in PPIF is leveraged roughly 3:1 or 300% (though slightly less after accounting for PPIP's borrowing costs).
Assuming the closed-end fund invests 40% (and it could be less or more), the effective leverage would be roughly 180%, or slightly under 2:1. That level of effective leverage would change based on the percentage the closed-end fund invests in PPIF.
Government involvement also introduces another element of uncertainty: possible changes in government policy could affect the fund. However, we don't expect surprises for two reasons: 1) we get the sense that lines of communication between the Treasury and BlackRock are relatively open; and 2) the government realizes company participation is crucial for PPIP's success, and is unlikely to alienate BlackRock.
http://finance.yahoo.com/news/Should-Investors-Bite-on-ms-4044256516.html?x=0&.v=1
BlackRock to Offer Public a Distressed Asset Fund
July 27, 2009, 7:40 am
Here is the latest pitch from Wall Street: those troubled assets at the banks could turn out to be gold for you. That is the line from BlackRock, the giant money manager, The New York Times’s Michael J. de la Merced writes.
BlackRock is putting together an investment fund that it says will give ordinary Americans a chance to profit from the financial bailouts that they are paying for. The company quietly filed plans on Friday to raise money for the vehicle.
For investors, the potential risks are considerable. The closed-end fund is to buy distressed mortgage securities from financial companies — the very investments that have hurt so many banks. It would be the first product aimed specifically at Main Street that is linked to the government’s now-diminished Public-Private Investment Program, which is meant to help purge these institutions of their worrisome investments.
If the BlackRock fund does well — that is, if the troubled home loans and commercial mortgages it buys recover in value — individual investors could profit from PPIP, pronounced p-pip. The program has met with a tepid response from banks and others, in part because bankers say they believe the markets are stabilizing and are thus reluctant to sell their troubled investments.
If the housing and commercial real estate markets were to take a turn for the worse, of course, investors in the new fund could lose money.
The BlackRock fund, known as the BlackRock Legacy Securities Public-Private Trust, stemmed from discussions between the firm and the Obama administration about how to involve Main Street investors in the financial bailouts. None of the other bailout programs are open to individual investors.
The Pacific Investment Management Company, the big bond investment firm, had also held talks with the Treasury Department over setting up a retail fund. But Pimco withdrew its application to take part in PPIP last month.
Involving mom-and-pop investors might help quiet criticism that only the Wall Street elite stand to profit from the financial rescue programs. A spokesman for BlackRock declined to comment, citing a regulatory quiet period.
The prospectus filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on Friday does not specify how big the BlackRock fund will be, but it will most likely be only a small stake alongside the many funds dedicated to the $1.5 trillion market for distressed mortgage securities. Most of the investment pools will be drawn from sophisticated investors like pension funds. BlackRock also plans to create an institutional fund to participate in PPIP.
In the past, BlackRock executives have stressed that any retail fund would have a low barrier to entry, though individual brokers who sell the product will determine the requirements for investors to participate. Based on other closed-end funds, it is possible the BlackRock product will require a minimum investment of $5,000 to $10,000.
BlackRock’s fund will combine the money it raises from investors with a matching equity contribution from the government, another feature meant to ensure that taxpayers will reap any upside from investments in these troubled securities.
The fund will then take advantage of special financing the government is making available to participants in PPIP, an amount of up to one-third of the fund’s assets. (The Treasury Department will also hold warrants in the fund, which will give it an additional small cut of any profits the fund makes.)
In an effort to mitigate the risk to investors, the fund will limit itself to securities backed by residential and commercial mortgages that were originally rated AAA by at least two ratings agencies before this year. BlackRock will halve its usual management fees for the fund.
Go to Article from The New York Times »
http://dealbook.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/07/27/blackrock-to-offer-public-a-distressed-asset-fund/
Megas went for the quick buck and got hung caring less about the shareholders. Then sat on his but doing nothing since. That is the real reason we are not trading!!!
Sorry my patients with his lack of action has worn thin as he should have keept up to date with everything instead of cutting bogus deals!!!
No deals no matter who!!!
Just keep everthing up to date and have a lawyer take care of the bad guys!!!
Sorry but the botton line is, if Megas stayed up to date with everything and did not try to cut deals with scum like Pino. WE WOULD BE TRADING NOW!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
WHY IS THIS NEW INFORMATION NOT IN THE STICKY NOTES????????????????????????????????????????
Hmmm I got slamed and called a basher when I said filings needed to be done before this would trade. Now here we are right back to needing filings done before anything can happen!!!
"The ball is in Megas court." Now watch nothing happen as usual!!!
That's strange, there are allot of activist judges making and changing laws all the time!!!
Could you please send one my way!!!
Can you direct me to this email???
Megas is hiding something, if he does not get off his but and file now. He does not want BCIT to trade!!!
No, not short at 6' 1" but I did sell FNM much taller then it is now!!!
Not Good
Industry Seeks Fannie, Freddie Overhaul Article Video Comments
By NICK TIMIRAOS
A mortgage-industry trade group is calling for Congress to transform Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac into several smaller privately held companies that would issue mortgage securities carrying an explicit government guarantee.
MarketWatch Hot Stocks: Financials
1:03
Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae tumble more than 15% after an industry group says the mortgage giants should be transformed into smaller, private companies that would issue mortgage securities guaranteed by the government.
The proposed framework, to be released Wednesday by the Mortgage Bankers Association, would give successor entities to Fannie and Freddie the authority to create securities backed by certain types of mortgages. The new companies would guarantee the securities against defaults on the underlying mortgages.
The new companies would also pay fees into a federal insurance fund, which would guarantee interest and principal payments to bondholders if the companies were unable to make them.
Such an insurance fund, designed to kick in only if the companies were to suffer catastrophic losses, would provide explicit federal backing. That would replace the current system, in which investors have long assumed that the government would stand behind Fannie and Freddie.
Some foreign investors in China and elsewhere lost confidence in that fuzzy implied guarantee last year and reduced their holdings of the companies' debt, though the U.S. government has propped up Fannie and Freddie with capital infusions.
"If we're going to restore and maintain investor confidence and...consistent liquidity, that is going to require an explicit backstop," said John Courson, chief executive and president of the MBA.
Shares of both Fannie and Freddie fell by more than 17% Tuesday in New York Stock Exchange trading. The price drops followed a Monday report from FBR Capital Markets that said there is "no fundamental value remaining" in the companies' shares.
The MBA's plan calls for government agencies, rather than the new companies, to assume the "mission" of promoting affordable housing that Congress has long assigned to Fannie and Freddie.
John Courson, CEO of the Mortgage Bankers Association, said restoring and maintaining investor confidence requires an explicit guarantee.
The new companies also wouldn't be allowed to hold large amounts of mortgages and securities under the proposal. Fannie and Freddie hold large investment portfolios in mortgages.
The proposal comes a year after the government seized control of Fannie and Freddie through a legal process known as conservatorship. It is one of several such plans likely to be floated this fall as debate heats up in Congress over how the government should restructure the $10 trillion home-mortgage market.
The Obama administration has said it will issue its own recommendations on the future of the housing-finance system early next year.
While the administration has moved quickly to remake sectors from autos to banks, addressing the future of Fannie and Freddie hasn't been a priority. In part that's because the administration is using the government-backed companies to help with foreclosure-prevention efforts and to stabilize the housing market.
Together with the Federal Housing Administration, Fannie and Freddie now purchase or guarantee nearly nine in 10 new mortgages, since private buyers of such loans have been absent amid the housing bust.
Fannie and Freddie have taken nearly $96 billion of capital infusions from the U.S. Treasury since last November. The companies have received nearly 10 times that amount in additional support through purchases of debt and mortgage-backed securities by the Treasury and the Federal Reserve.
Analysts expect the housing-finance debate to drag on for months, if not years.
Republicans have argued that Fannie and Freddie were brought down as a result of a decade-long affordable-housing push that steered them into loosening their standards. House Republicans have put forward their own plan that would end government conservatorship of the companies within the next 18 months.
Democrats have said that the companies' troubles stemmed from a poorly regulated private-lending market that encouraged Fannie and Freddie to make questionable decisions in an attempt to regain market share they lost to Wall Street firms.
"If we learn the wrong lessons, we'll create a system that doesn't bring capital to underserved communities," said Sarah Rosen Wartell, an executive vice president at the Center for American Progress, a liberal think tank that has close ties to the Obama administration. The center has convened a study group on the future of housing finance that will issue a report this fall.
A report published last month by analysts at Moody's Investors Service said that the likelihood that both companies would be replaced with a new entity "continues to increase as their losses mount." The report predicted that it could take at least a decade of government ownership before Fannie and Freddie become viable stand-alone entities.
While the companies' full losses won't be known until the housing market stabilizes, losses could reach $175 billion by the end of 2010, according to an estimate by Bose George, an analyst who covers the companies for Keefe, Bruyette & Woods.
The Obama administration appears unlikely to seek an extension from Congress of emergency authority that allows the U.S. Treasury to buy the agencies' debt, which expires Dec. 31. The Treasury is instead expected to take steps to assure the marketplace that the government will continue to keep borrowing costs low for the companies.
Write to Nick Timiraos at nick.timiraos@wsj.com
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB125186013970178403.html?ru=yahoo&mod=yahoo_hs
How can you bluff when you are run by the same people your bluffing???
I play poker every day and would never bluff with the cards showing I was beat!!!
When I call, they answer the phone BlackrocK!!!
Anthracite Capital has not been shareholder friendly with all their games.
Not insider buying. They where non-open market aquisition or in a better word, compensation
Can the mods please do a survey if shareholders want to start a blanket class action suit? This suit would include everyone involved, Megas included.
Different day. Same no filings, press or anything from Megas!!!
It's not just TARP; the Fannie-Freddie rescue could turn a profit too
Posted by Justin Fox Tuesday, September 1, 2009 at 9:52 am
Submit a Comment • Trackback (0) • Related Topics: bailoutsregulation
Yesterday, when I pointed to the signs that the Troubled Asset Relief Program could actually turn out to be a money-maker, I left Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac out of the discussion. Their rescue wasn't part of TARP, for one thing, and for another I had no idea whether they had a shot of earning their way out of trouble. They've certainly dug themselves a big hole: In the budget projections it released last week, the Congressional Budget Office tagged the Fannie/Freddie rescue as the single biggest cost item to come out of the financial crisis so far (at $291 billion in fiscal 2009, compared to $133 billion for TARP and $115 billion for the stimulus bill).
Well, it turns out that my favorite Antipodean financial regulator turned surfer/blogger/hedge fund manager, John Hempton, has been hard at work on an exhaustive analysis of Fannie's and Freddie's prospects. He's had to interrupt it after breaking his collarbone in a biking accident, but he summed up his preliminary conclusions a couple of weeks ago:
Pre-tax, pre-provision operating profits of Freddie Mac are running at over $15 billion. If the government were not demanding 10 percent on its preference shares the companies would be sufficiently well capitalised to repay their interest in 4 years. With the drag of having to pay the government $5 billion per annum it will take a bit over five years. Either way the operating profits of Freddie Mac are big enough to ensure the government gets its money back. If you do the same analysis for Fannie Mae its is even better. ... The consensus view that the GSEs are forever toast – and forever a drain on the US Government is very likely wrong.
Hempton sees one giant risk to his rosy scenario—that Congress will take punitive action against Fannie and Freddie that makes it impossible for them to repay their debts. Congressional Republicans would love to shut Fannie and Freddie down or at least shrink them dramatically, and some people in the Obama Administration have in the past at least been similarly disposed. They're not necessarily wrong to think this way—the facts don't support the argument that Fannie and Freddie caused the financial crisis, but they are problematic organizations that probably shouldn't be allowed to continue to exist in their pre-2008 form. And reforming them will be much harder once they've paid back all the money taxpayers have advanced them. But reforming them before they've paid back all the money may make it impossible for them to pay back all the money.
http://curiouscapitalist.blogs.time.com/2009/09/01/its-not-just-tarp-the-fannie-freddie-rescue-could-turn-a-profit-too/
Calling for an investigation of the price run up is positive??? The clowns on fast money should do their DD before calling for an investigation. They did not understand why the price went up before the citadell news, but did not mention S&P upgraded ETFC before the move.
And of coarse no comment from Megas!!!
"we are back to square zero. no contact, no comment from the SEC or DTCC:"
Put me down for FNM please
FNM, FRE and C toasted all those picks!!! Why not mention them???
Get off your but and File MEGAS!!!
Do you realize you have to file with the SEC???
Did you forget you run a business???
I cannot hear you Megas!!!
When will you get off your but and file with the SEC and put out news???
Better yet, How about getting BCIT trading!!!
Barclays doubled down!!! Big names buying AVII this month.
2009-08-18 2009-06-30 13F-HR/A Barclays Global Investors Uk Holdings Ltd Institution 3,096,441 Added More 1,532,983 98.05 %
http://www.mffais.com/avii
We have known that four years now, what's your point???
Its only been years MEGAS!!!
How about a press release Tommy-Boy!!!
How about getting BCIT trading Tommy Boy!!!
Are we trading yet Tommy-Boy???
Where in the world is Tom Megas???