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.
Trinityz, guess we'll see
You post:
"I predict by March is when a straw will break the camel's back. Now whether that will be a positive or negative thing, or if the effect are + or - , I don't wish to predict."
Maybe we'll get something about the roll-up & FVF process by then. The warrants might even be issued. Always seems to happen in the future, just like the last 12 months.
best2
You seem to know more about the law
than I do, I am not a lawyer. I do know that a company's share price usually tanks on a lawsuit or SEC letter. Do what you believe is best.
I actually have a net profit of over $5K from trading Grifco (due more to luck than skill). I don't feel enough outrage, or see enough potential reward, to justify the expence and aggravation of legal action. I realize that pink management in general depends on attitudes like mine for the success of their schemes. Consider for a moment that Grifco's PRs could be deliberately written poorly to discourage any one who has the potential to sue from buying.
Just my opinions
best2
Warrants "Record Date" isn't the distribution
date. Warrant distribution may happen some time in the (big, string-you-along, extends-on-forever) future. Record date, so what! We had a "record date" for the CTBG share dividend in May.
http://biz.yahoo.com/iw/060505/0127376.html
A record date just means the company collects shareholder names and holdings for a future distribution when/if that "forward looking" distribution ever happens.
My point about the disclaimer was that they lied in the fine print since, to my knowledge, there are no "SEC Filings" providing information about risks. The legal disclaimer - of all the places to lie, or mislead!
You post about taking on a small company, "The rewards would actually be greater."
Maybe not if, for example, Grifco expends all their cash defending against the law suit and transfers assets out of the company (one way or another) while the suit is in progress. If someone spends 25K they could easily uncover an empty purse and a bankrupt company IMO. I think that if Grifco had good income they would brag about profits (instead of purchase orders) in their PRs.
Just some thoughts about a hypothetical law suit.
best2
I agree that if anyone has evidence of fraud go for it.
I see this about the same way you do and I do not know of any fraud, but maybe some shareholder will take their concerns to a professional for a real opinion. Dr. Bill has posted in the past that most shareholders just sell, take the loss, and move on. Penny stock artists count on this - just as management counts on the fact that most shareholders don't bother to vote, much less attempt to place items on the proxy or take action.
I agree that Grfico seems to have been careful to hide behind such things as the "forward looking" protections. There have been some glaring errors in the PRs (but remember the "Offer" PR was from Lyamec). One minor(?) thing is that the boilerplate disclaimer on some of the old PRs has the phrase:
"More information about the risks and uncertainties relating to the Company's forward-looking statements are found in our SEC filings."
Here's one from CTT:
"These and other risks are described in the Company's filings with the Securities and Exchange Commission, which should be read in conjunction herewith for a further discussion of important factors that could cause actual results to differ materially from those in the forward-looking statements."
There is no information about risks and uncertainties in the single GFCI or CTT SEC paper reg. D filings as I recall. Odd to lie to the public in you own legal disclaimer.
just my opinion and I'm not a lawyer
best2
Dr. Bill re: shareholder rebellion
You'll find Grifco in court complaining that the proxies were illegally solicited and demanding an injunction (all legal fees paid for by Grifco shareholders of course). This happened when some Senetek PLC shareholders, led by mad fund manager Heiko Thieme, rebelled and wanted their candidate on the board. Here's their "Dear Shareholder" letter explaining their actions after the stock had lost 80% of it's value under management's stewardship
http://www.senetekplc.net/SENETEK/Shareholder%20letter%20Nov%202003.pdf
"..the Company was forced to file a lawsuit to seek the protection of the Federal District Court. Senetek contends in its lawsuit that the Thieme brothers’ efforts were a flagrant violation of the proxy rules..."
Maybe there has been good reason for a shareholder rebellion in some situations. But consider the posibility that you're right about Grifco's assets and float. Some might fell vindicated by a lawsuit or shareholder rebellion but how would shareholders benefit financially?
best2
Thanks BBB, a Tour de Force of Jarvis Bay
in the Pink Sea. You did not mention Claude Eldridge of USEG and founder of Trans Global Funding, the hedge fund that, I suspect, shorts the shares associated with Jarvis pinks. As I recall Claude ended up running USEG by "default" LOL. Guess you can't mention them all without writing a book.
So J. Dial's old company, Summit Entertainment Group, ended up as the Silverhawk shell and Pittboss as USEG. I missed the part where the assets and shareholders of SETG were rolled into Karma Media, Inc. Many investors, including me it seems, are still confused by the shell game of name changes. Glad that you're keeping track.
Are the Grifco lease options in fact the former USEG "bankable" reserves on the Phillips Ranch?
best2
BBB "...PR's to pull the wool over investors' eyes?"
208 leases = 208 well sites
Warrants for 10 leases = Warrants for 10 wells
Offer = Offering
CTT Record Date = nothing
"Logic tells me that the case for making such outlandish claims [dumping new shares] would have to be backed up by upward -- not sidewinding -- price manipulation."
That's exactly why some suspect the company. Does your logic tell you who would sell millions and millions of shares on a PR before much price movement? My likely candidates are the company, shorts, and Trans Global. If the shorts smell a P&D they pile in on the peak. In this situation there is no peak! IMO Grifco would be better served by more transparency if they have nothing to hide.
Agreed - "If this is all nothing but a pump and dump, it is an exceedingly very poor one!"
USEG has claimed "bankable" reserves - what ever that means - the options expire as you say. Mr. Taylor needs to get a hole started!
BTW Excellent post & thanks for the information about the Taylors.
best2
Former Jarvis shell records missing
J. Jarvis & J. Dial surrendered some shares to the new owners of Silverhawk (SVHG.PK) but someone "lost" the records for the old shell (where have we heard that before).
I think that Pittboss > Summit Entertainment Group > Extreme Innovations (Extreme Toys) > Silverhawk Entertainment = SVHG.PK
https://www.otcstockinfo.com/repository/656608/656608_FR33.pdf
"A change of control was affected by John D. Jarvis on September 12, 2005 with the relinquishment of 12,000,000 shares beneficially owned by him and the issuance of the shares to the officers, directors or assigns of Extreme Toys, Inc.
On 10/12/05 the 12,000,000 shares originally issued in October 2004 to founder James Dial were canceled as the completion of the agreement.
________________
The Summit Entertainment Group records are lost but there's share accounting from the transfer agent:
https://www.otcstockinfo.com/repository/656608/656608_FR36.pdf
"For the shares issued prior to September 14, 2005 the company has no individual records as they were the records of Summit Entertainment Group, Inc. The merger between Extreme Innovations, Inc. and Summit Entertainment Group, Inc. with Extreme Innovations, Inc. remaining as the survivor did not require the survivor to maintain the records of the predecessor except for the assets retained. The records were left in possession of the officers of Summit Entertainment Group, Inc. and are not currently available to management. We have compiled the information from inception through September 14, 2005 from the company transfer agent and prior public information that had been supplied by Mr. John Jarvis the former President of Summit Entertainment Group."
__________________
The link goes on to list former shareholders BY NAME (recognize any from here or RB?)+ shares. Anyone think the new owners of Silverhawk are in for a surprise? (SVHG.PK up 27% TODAY)
best2
Hi Dr. Bill,
You post:
"Can you get any more illegal? I don't think so."
Technically, trading on insider information is "more illegal" than posting a vague opinion on R.B. qualified with the word "should".
Generally speaking, In my opinion you're right on here for the Jarvis group:
"...it's only dirty money anyways......a surge done by corrupt means, stock manipulation, huckster promotion sites, etc only results in bad money, and with bad money comes bad circumstances."
Of course in the pinks insider trading is assumed. I watch for big trades with no news. Not much guilt though because I can't out-guess the con artists on a regular basis. If it weren't for greed, few speculators would chance the pinks. As they say, "you can't cheat an honest man" - I think those guys buy XOM.
best2
Zen Cohen posts on RB that "financials should
be out any day". Before you laugh remember who he is and that he has been working with Grifco to resolve the IPMC shell records problem. Also recall the trading on Monday.......
best2
BBB are these the USEG leases?
USEG Eldridge/Jarvis had leases in Crockett Co. Are these the same leases Jim Dial has acquired (or has an option to acquire)?
John Jarvis seems to be the obvious connection.
best2
PR's now lame but effective for dumping
Jim Dial has notified himself that he will attempt to get Mellon involved as agent for the restricted warrants. Since he controls both Universal Energy Resources and Grifco International, I guess this was an arm's length transaction - if he held the pen at arm's length
"Grifco International, Inc. (Pink Sheets: GFCI - News) announced today that it has received written notification from Universal Energy Resources, Inc. that it has selected Mellon Investor Services to act as its warrant agent in connection with the issuance of Series A, B, and C Preference Drilling Participation Shares."
____________
You don't suppose that the name dropping (Mellon) produced some hits on the ask? 4.5 million shares traded on Friday Dec. 15 and the PR was issued at 10:51 AM.
best2
Print, the phrases in your post
might be construed to mean that you're accusing someone here of being a shill or roper. I'm glad that you clarified your post and stated that, in your opinion, nothing illegal is happening. Of course I don't think that Grifco or Jim Dial would risk using a shill on RB or that anyone posting here is a shill.
It's possible that a shill or roper could be posting on any given pink sheet chat board. Though I don't think this is the case here, you can read about this jargon and figure out what Olive means by the phrase "rope a dope" here:
http://everything2.com/index.pl?node_id=327329
"In its most basic sense, the term shill refers to a long con operator who simply poses as a person taking advantage of the little game, often successfully. At times, however, it is necessary for the shill to appear to be unsuccessful. For instance, during the sting, if it is necessary for the mark to lose money, it often helps cool the beef if one or more shills also lose money. This makes the mark's loss more palatable.
As above, the shill may act as a cooler (or smoother). For example, if he "loses" money just like the mark does, he may help to cool the beef. If the cooler loses more money than the mark, the mark may feel better knowing that he is better off. If the cooler commiserates with him, he might feel better still. The cooler can also provide false information, for instance, telling the mark that the insider and/or the roper have left town, been arrested, lost money themselves, etc. Especially when the mark is upset with the roper (understandably blaming the roper for his loss), it helps to have a separate cooler who can fill this role."
"When the mark is finally allowed to come in on the little game the roper often acts as a shill, investing or risking just the same as the mark (of course, with none of the real risk the mark faces). The roper often acts as a joker or inverse shill, displaying confidence when the mark is in doubt, fear when the mark is bold, suspicion when the mark is confident. Most importantly, since the roper is in the mark's confidence, if the mark starts to run out the roper must rope him back in."
__________
My opinion about Grifco is simply:
"Never attribute to malaise those events which can adequately be explained by stupidity"
Just my opinions and comments
best2
BBB feel free to disagree
since returns on unproven, future gas wells is like arguing about how many fairies can dance on a pinhead.
Here are your points one by one:
1) You post about future profits - given the defective shells that Grifco bought why should the lease deals they bought be any better? "A $200 up-front investment becomes $500 over 10 years" this is NOT great return even though most of the production is early in the life of the well. "The appreciating value of the underlying stock" is a fantasy based on unknown returns from un-drilled wells. No one knows whether or not Grifco will ever drill on those leases.
2) It's not a dividend but a return on the warrant conversion price investment. Each 20¢ warrant conversion returns the principal when $1.2 million is realized on the NRI according to my calculations. It's still a pig in a poke and there's no indication of possible return on these sites until Grifco actually drills a well on one of their sites. I'll grant that Grifco could make the conversions look attractive enough to fund some new wells ("participate within the commercialization of the gas leases") if any wells are actually drilled.
3) "Practically all warrant conversions (especially those that are offered by Mellon, or the like) can be easily executed by investors with what are called cashless conversions, where an investor can easily convert ALL exercisable warrants, selling off a small portion of the resulting shares to pay associated fees incurred during the exercise." LOL The warrants are "restricted" and won't be free trading for two years - will the Dilling Participation Shares be free trading? The warrants are callable so Grifco will call them if there's any chance of great profit.
best2
BBB, Consider for a moment
that you've been conned by Grifco management. Consider that the fall in Grifco's market cap could be due to persistent failures to deliver results by management not failures to deliver stock by naked shorts.
Consider that the "force majeur" reasons for the failures you have listed resulted from management incompetence rather than acts of nature. Either due diligence was ignored or botched in the shell selection process and other business plans. Management has repeatedly compounded their folly by issuing self imposed deadlines for future events they failed to properly plan or execute.
Now they've boasted about another new event they can't possibly deliver on time in my opinion.
"Under the terms of the option, the Company will begin spudding on 7 drill sites in the next 30 days. Each drill site will take approximately 2 weeks to complete. It will take another 2-3 weeks for commercial production."
30 days is a very, very tight timetable and the PR quoted above was issued Wednesday December 13, 2006 at 4:05 pm ET. Consider for a moment that this is just another self imposed deadline for Grifco to blow off.
Is there any filing/permit/request/notification by Grifco, Jim Dial, Precision Drilling & Exploration, Inc., or Universal Energy Resources, Inc. with the Texas Railroad Commission?
Has Mellon Investor Services agreed to act as the warrant agent for the Series A, B, and C Preference Drilling Participation Shares?
Do the drilling permits, the warrants, or the Drilling Participation Shares, even exist?
Surely you should be able to find out for yourself through the TRC or your many contacts.
best2
Sounds more like Jim Dial than his victims
in my opinion BBB. Look at the company's performance under his stewardship.
"To act like him is to serve a friend a plate of fresh vomit with a wide grin, all the while saying, "bon apetit!""
I think there is a lump of coal in that Christmas Day "Record Date" gift from Grifco. The Texas Railroad Commission has nothing on Precision Drilling, Grifco, or James Dial according to posts on R.B. Is the company actually going to drill in the "30 day" time frame?
bon appétit
best2
Grifco Futurama, playing at a brokerage near you
Grifco Futurama episodes (FIRST YEAR)
1) Future warrants "record date"
2) Future asset roll-up "forward merger" plan
3) Future OTC reporting status
4) Future pay-off for yet to be developed gas leases
5) Future Libyan facility
6) Future CTT subsidiary spin-off, melt down, or bust
7) Future $2.25 GOTL offering/listing agreement
8) Two or three future, maybe-could-happen-later stock buy back plans
Looks like Grifco stockholders will be rich in the future, as Annie said:
Tomorrow is always one day away
best2
Assuming that Grifco actually intends
to issue the warrants, can legally issue the warrants, and successfully issues the warrants then (check my arithmetic):
Converting 1000ea. 20¢ warrants through the agent for $200 + fees gets you 0.00017 net royalty interest in a genuine Texas gas well. Now on the bloated "initial" flow from the first well filtered through an almost error free PR from Grifco....
Some warrant holders might convert (if they can convert a restricted warrant).
$200 ÷ $400,000 X 33% NRI = 0.00016666 NRI
best2
Bill, what you say is true but,
as we know, a "record date" by itself is pretty meaningless with out any schedule for distribution. I guess that a plausible story at least keeps stockholders from dumping. Here's why it could actually happen IMO.
This time, instead of giving away an asset (CTT stock), Grifco is providing an opportunity for investors to give Jim Dial cash. When/if the warrants are converted, money leaves investor's pockets and enters Grifco's bank account.
Depending on the how the initial production from the first well is portrayed (in a breathless PR), there could actually be some interest in converting the warrants. Investors provide the funding - Grifco keeps 2/3 of the net royalty interest. Management, and their new TTII back office chums, ought to be motivated by their own self interest to get this done soon.
I don't know what the potential problems are with a scheme for 144 warrant conversion. For example, could the warrants be converted on demand soon after issue or is there a forced delay since they are "restricted" in some manor?
Surely there's PR potential from this scheme if Grifco issues something, anything, to stockholders.
best2
Bill, glad to see you've changed your tune
Jim Dial should be enthusiastic about getting those warrants into the hands of potential investors. Think of the warrants as an opportunity for investors to fund the development of Grifco's new gas venture. We should see the warrants issued as soon as Grifco's steadfast management and their new TTII chums can arrange it!
Can you imagine any minor, trifling difficulties that would cause a slight delay in either setting a date or issuing the warrants by any chance?
best2
A note from Scrooge
An acquaintance of mine, that gadfly J____, mentioned a failing penny stock company last year and persuaded me to join him and work with his Trans Global chop shop for our mutual benefit.
So using my B.V.I. Limited company, several brokers, and my new associate J____, we profited nearly $5 million as the price fell. Having an almost unlimited share supply for our derivatives through stock loans and placements was very handy. Though some of these shares were technically "restricted" they are, of course, an asset in the British Virgin Islands and on Howe street. As a bonus I got to see a quaint "hoochie-coochie show" in Texas put on by the locals and short the price tops on those outlandish press releases as well. It was all so very enjoyable that it almost made me feel young again.
I covered the last of our shorts and unwound all our positions starting late in November. I never bother with stocks worth less than a U.S. nickel because it's simply not worth the time. Now I see some other fellow wants to ride the price down from here. I wonder how he got the company to issue all those preposterous press releases to support his sales?
Scrooge
___________
All in fun and, I think, just as likely as the big bad naked shorts. Enjoy the holidays everyone.
ps If a stock closes down 50% on Tuesday and closes up 100% on Wednesday it's price is unchanged from Monday's close - this topic isn't worth an arguement IMO. Now EBITDA on the other hand....
best2
Trinityz1, A new "Record Date"!
Trinityz1, you ask:
"When will the warrants actually post to our accounts?"
Nobody knows. If you compare these two PRs, you can see why the announcement has not produced much reaction.
PR from December 15, 2006
"...the Record Date close of business on December 25, 2006. All shareholders on the Record Date will be entitled to receive their pro rata share of Class A, B and C Preference Drilling Participation Shares. Further details will follow."
PR from March 30, 2006"
"Coil Tubing Technology, Inc... ...today announced May 1, 2006, as the record date for the previously announced spin-off of the Company from its parent company Grifco International, Inc... ...Grifco shareholders as of the record date will receive a pro rata distribution of the Company's shares..."
___________________________
The "Record Date" just means they find out who owns Grifco shares on that date. We don't know a date when (or if) the Rule 144K warrants will be issued. There may be some unforeseen difficulties with the "forward looking" distribution plan - as there were with the CTT share dividend.
best2
Print, it's an amended report
I can't see anything changed from the old one ??
best2
BBB, I look for a PR with accuracy
This has been a problem for Grifco and it's partners (Lyamec $2.25 "offer"). Any "error" always seems to inflate the prospects for the company.
When the truth emerges these errors cause disillusion, dissatisfaction, and loss of credibility. Someone at Grifco ought to proofread the garbled things before they are released. Does Mike King even read them before publication?
best2
No, BBB it's Grifco that's mistaken
or misleading in the 7 wells PR.
First, there are "208 gas leases located in the Permian Basin geologic formation in Crockett County, Texas." but later in the PR
"The net proceeds from the 7 drill sites will be used by the Company to expand drilling operations to the remaining 208 drill sites "
208 leases - 7 drill sites leaves 208 drill sites remaining. OK, I thought this meant 215 wells on 208 leases.
Now you insist that leases should be drill sites in the PRs! If so the math is wrong 208 - 7 is not 208 though 208 wells on 10 leases sounds much better.
HOW MANY TOTAL LEASES ARE THERE, 10 or 208? Big difference! This is a substancial error.
best2
Dr. Bill, I'm eating crow, munch, munch
No POP today as I predicted but instead:
Lots & lots of shares for sale
Lots and lots of PRs for selling
Lots of volume
No price movement
Just as you predicted & it's hard to ignore your arguments. Could be the year-end Grifco share clearance sale before the new Universal model is rolled out. Seems to be frantic activity on both the trading & the PR front :)
best2
BBB, you misunderstood the PR
You post:
"For starters, each traunch considers a grand total of 10 gas wells, or 30 wells for all 3 traunch."
The PR says the warrants can be converted into "Participation Shares entitle the owner to a mandatory dividend of 33 1/3% on the Net Royalty Income from gas production realized on a total of 10 certain gas leases in Crockett County, Texas." Should be more than 1 well per lease! The difference in the series is the time on the warrants 2,3,or 4 years.
The conversion provides money to further develop the leases, as I read it, drill more wells. "Warrant Holders must convert in minimum traunches of $400,000 per gas well to be spudded."
These are Rule 144 warrants but have a registration rights agreement attached. You can (God help you) convert a series A traunch for $400,000 (2 million warrants at 20¢ ea.). I'm not sure how the income is divided as the wells are drilled and brought in to production. Seems that the longer you wait the more income will be generated from the leases as more wells are drilled.
Nice to see that I'm not the only one confused by this deal
best2
Everyone's amazed, things are moving again
and the next act is coming together. Maybe someone will work on our little friend here:
Strongus, I don't pretend to know
whether of not Grifco is a good long term play; I suspect, guess, and speculate (and vent as the price continues to fall). So far I haven't bought a large holding because fear has it over greed for now. Since GFCI is a pink sheet stock the truth is probably different from what I imagine. The public (like me) won't know anything concrete until GFCI/Universal releases a filing.
There's no question in my mind that Grifco's stock has been traded for profit on the various PR announcements from the way the price and volume have moved. In the past, when there was a great PR announcement there were always plenty of GFCI shares sold into the POP IMO. Some market player won't let it run and has plenty of shares to sell in my view. Again, I have no facts showing that Grifco management is in any way involved in the active market for their stock or part of any "scam".
I'm interested in tomorrow's action to see how trading goes. Is some market player going to dump on the news?
best2
Strongus, we'll see what some of the recent buyers do with their stock holdings tomorrow. Maybe the price will run this time - keep your fingers crossed .
best2
Hi Dr. Bill,
I see you read my post on RB.
Told you "something else" was going on with the big, big volume over the last 2 weeks. It wasn't a P&D on those lame PRs, as you suggested, just someone gathering shares for a pop. See #8134:
"If the 14 million share buyers were just new suckers or day traders, why are they still holding? The price would have fallen further on the dump - IMO something else is happening."
Note the tight drilling schedule:
"...the Company will begin spudding on 7 drill sites in the next 30 days. Each drill site will take approximately 2 weeks to complete. It will take another 2-3 weeks for commercial production."
Goes well with the merger time table & imagine the enhanced PR possibilities! GFCI is down but not out of play yet. We'll see how far they let it run this time. With all this hype it could go, go, go unless the recent buyers stem the rising tide by dumping their cheap shares (like the $2.25 PR).
Just my opinion
best2
Anyone hitting the "sell button" at 4.5¢
is locking in a loss. True, you need an enthusiastic shill or two for a good con.
On the other hand sometimes a mark become enthusiastic about a losing investment after being reassured by the confidence man in a private conversation or meeting. Sometimes investors "fall in love" with a losing investment because their pride is involved. 'My great research' and 'My perceptions' vs. the loss ("it's only temporary") in the investment's value.
Anyone who knows what a Grifter is would be reluctant to put money into a company called "Grifco".
best2
Good point Cleverox, one you didn't mention
I can think of two reasons that would make the buy-back sensible:
1) Reducing the O.S. count for a CTT share dividend close to 1.89 CTT/GFCI or some such ratio that's listed in the Letter of Intent.
2) Defend the stock price from collapse during the long merger wait.
# 1 is a possibility since the CTT spin-off & share dividend must happen before the merger in order to avoid splitting CTT (& the dividend) with TTII holders (who would be entitled to an equal consideration after the merger). In this case Grifco has repeatedly insisted that there will be some kind of CTT spin-off in increasingly shrill PRs. I can't say it better than your happy phrase, which could apply to most of Grifco's PRs:
"It has been approved and blah, blah, blah is going forward blah, blah, blah."
There's a "Letter of Intent" circulating and they could be adjusting the O.S. so the sharecounts match it's stipulations.
#2 means, as you suggest, that Grifco will string out the merger process as long as they can, possibly hoping for a turn around in a weak financial position. I have no facts as to what that financial position is but, as Cyo & Bill keep pointing out, something really, really good would be touted one way of another.
best2
I don't agree with the "naked Shorts" theory
though Grifco has been an obvious short play. I think there was legitimate shorting on the pops. The daily trading volume is high & Grifco has never traded over it's 200 day EMA (well, maybe for two days). Either you are right about dilution (I posted the reasons why I disagree) or someone / several people are trading the stock frequently. I attribute the action to Trans Global et al. and am suspicious about the faxed holdings which could provide a listing of shares to borrow for legitimate short sales. My thinking isn't based on facts, those are hard to come by with Grifco, just the trading as the price continues it's march into the toilet.
I don't know why Grifco is reticent about share counts. They don't disclose anything they aren't required to disclose in the pink world (which requires nothing). The crummy PR's and lack of either follow-through or disclosure are enough to explain the price decline IMO. Massive dilution plus the above would already have GFCI below a penny in my view.
You must wonder why Grifco, if it's a money losing scam, would move into a reporting shell.
best2
Hi Cyo, the quotes were taken
from the TTII proxy statement, not your post.
You can tell by my use of the phrase 'new issue' that I'm in the second school. I think (my guess) the 56.5 shares were issued for the merger by Jim Dial acting as agent and attorney-in-fact for Grifco shareholders while pursuing the merger (and are restricted). This could be resolved if we knew the details about Majority Shareholders of Grifco, Inc. - but we don't.
You're right the TTII 14A is silent about where these GFCI shares came from. The facts should become clear during the merger.
best2
O.S. Sharecount is in your face
and implied by the word "majority".
"Majority Shareholders of Grifco International, Inc.", a Nevada corporation controlled by Jim Dial has pledged 56.5 million shares of Grifco for the merger. If 41 million shares would have been a "majority" (a number greater than the float) on May 1 why did Mr. Dial pledge 56.5 million instead?
Logical answer: the O.S. are probably slightly less than 56.5 million in order for that new issue to be a "majority". There might be some padding in that new issue to allow for other new issues before the merger is final.
This logic challenges Bill's hundreds of millions of shares outstanding theory - now I'm in for it :)
JMHO
best2
Cyo, They could also tout the FVF effective R.S.
and allay investor concerns by announcing that the higher, post R.S. share price is a requirement in the pursuit of an AMEX listing. The AMEX listing is already planned strategy per TTII's proxy notice.
best2
"I'm high all right, but not on false drugs.
I'm high on the real thing; powerful gasoline, a clean windshield, and a shoe shine!" (Firesign Theater)
If the 14 million share buyers were just new suckers or day traders, why are they still holding? The price would have fallen further on the dump - IMO something else is happening.
If Jim Dial controlled most of the O.S. why would he :
1) Be worried about a hostile takeover
2) Bother to issue super voting shares
3) Concern himself with an outside "control group" - as in the meeting notice
Anyone think that the FVF will result in an effective 100:1 R.S.(100 GFCI = 1 Universal)? Do you think that the 56 million UERI shares are registered???? Ha Ha
best2
Grifco says "will" buy back or "is" buying?
"Grifco... ...announced today that its board of directors has approved a share buy back initiative to purchase common shares of the Company. The shares of GFCI.PK will be purchased in the open market in any amount up to five million shares by the Company."
I know that carefully written PRs are not Grifco's strong point, but notice that the tense changes in the PR from future tense to present tense:
"At present, the buy back program is being financed [not "the buy back program will be financed" or "we plan to finance the program"] by the Company without the necessity of outside financing."
Some buyer has already been supporting the price over the last 6 sessions & lapping up cheap 6¢ shares. If they can get (or did get) 5 million shares for 6¢ ea. the cost would be $300,000
Could Grifco be the mystery buyer supporting the share price over the last few high volume days?
Unless there's a dump on this PR, Dr. Bill's screwy P&D theory is in grave jeopardy.
best2
Who said naked shorts?
Not me Bill, you misread my post - I said:
"I don't think that short covering can explain it."
Tax selling or capitulation can explain the sellers - the buyers are harder to account for. You talked up a P&D scheme on the PRs but they are LAME PRs and the large volume trades ramped up 3 days later. Your PR & printing theory is just as bad as the NS paranoia.
Dumping would drive down the price. Even though 10 million shares have traded in the last 6 sessions the price hasn't collapsed. I agree with most of your points but you're wrong about PR buyers.
best2