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.
SLJB's newest CEO is still listed w/Devries as an officer of this Nevada corp.
https://esos.state.nv.us/SOSServices/AnonymousAccess/CorpSearch/CorpDetails.aspx?lx8nvq=jyqxhApL6ooCgAKf5%252f1oxA%253d%253d
according to his "CEO" bio on the Marquee site, he formerly held a series 7.
however, according to NASD records, he is currently an NASD member w/a series 7.
it may be identified in the Reg D paper filing.
anyone can order it from the SEC for free, though the mailing process is apparently slower than one might like.
edit: "working for him" could certainly be construed in a number of ways IMO.
to wit: is Marquee "working for him"?!?
i thought the theory du jour about the SPAM & fax blasts was that those were disseminated by off-shore hedge funds that were net short SLJB. my impression of your message is that you are now attributing those promotional communications to Devries.
if that impression is not correct, please advise at your earliest convenience.
tia.
Has anyone spoken to Marquee lately? TIA
any info on whether Petar is still an active business associate with Andrew Devries III?
yeah, i noticed that...
i especially enjoyed the repeated misuse of the word "there."
because you are...
somewhat pendantic Susie.
i doubt Matt has time to run around to all the pump boards deciding what info to suppress.
Matt authorized Rager's witchhunt requests for bannings.
is that better?
semantics aside, the substance remains the same.
pumper clowns on SLJB wanted me banned because i had dug up facts that they didn't like on more than one occasion.
FYI:
he has also even threatened to have pumpers banned if they annoy him:
Posted by: ohiobuckkeye
In reply to: None Date:9/7/2006 9:39:52 AM
Post #of 65706
Is this really what one would expect from a moderator? Last night at 12pm I sent one OT!
Sent By PM: Rager Date: 9/7/2006 5:39:46 AM
Next time you post o/t I will ask to have you bannede [sic] ok jerk
http://www.investorshub.com/boards/read_msg.asp?message_id=13156425
Public Reply | Private Reply | Keep | Last Read Next 100 | Previous | Next
Posted by: bobrainey300
In reply to: Rager who wrote msg# 65688 Date:9/7/2006 9:51:24 AM
Post #of 65711
You don't need to be a moderator. When you send me pms laced with profanity for a couple posts about football, that is a clue that you are taking this bbs too seriously.
http://www.investorshub.com/boards/read_msg.asp?message_id=13156945
Public Reply | Private Reply | Keep | Last Read Replies (7) | Next 100 | Previous | Next
Posted by: Rager
In reply to: ohiobuckkeye who wrote msg# 65676 Date:9/7/2006 9:44:03 AM
Post #of 65712
buckeye, (jerk) thanx for yours, skinlvr, bobbrainey, SPIN, fringe and a few other jerks,
it has made my decision final...
y'all can find another moderator to play babysitter for those that act like they are still in kintergarden.
http://www.investorshub.com/boards/read_msg.asp?message_id=13156599
Public Reply | Private Reply | Keep | Last Read Next 100 | Previous | Next
Posted by: testekleez
In reply to: Rager who wrote msg# 65688 Date:9/7/2006 9:48:04 AM
Post #of 65714
I thought we weren't supposed to get "personal" here lol.
http://www.investorshub.com/boards/read_msg.asp?message_id=13156795
Public Reply | Private Reply | Keep | Last Read Next 100 | Previous | Next
Posted by: The_Free_Nebula
In reply to: Rager who wrote msg# 65688 Date:9/7/2006 9:51:11 AM
Post #of 65717
You are getting too wrapped up...I really only meant to send one OT to buckeye because of the big game...Didn't want to convert the board into a football forum that is why I ot'd it...It was late and the CEO thing was getting old and boring. Did not have any intention of escalating this into a brawl. Gotta let humans be humans....We all know the rules. Life without exception is hell
TFN
http://www.investorshub.com/boards/read_msg.asp?message_id=13156935
Public Reply | Private Reply | Keep | Last Read Next 100 | Previous | Next
Posted by: tryintoclimb
In reply to: asus who wrote msg# 65663 Date:9/7/2006 9:50:22 AM
Post #of 65717
How about you stay Asus, and Rager goes.
http://www.investorshub.com/boards/read_msg.asp?message_id=13156890
Rager --- please explain how i supposedly violated the iHub TOS sufficiently (if at ALL!) for you to justify banning me from the SLJB board on or about August 31, 2006.
haven't noted anything in the iHub terms & conditions which precludes people from posting factual & independently verifiable info from an SRO about a public persona connected directly to a stock/issuer, especially where that info is posted on the iHub MB dedicate to that particular stock.
thanks in advance!
is this the new SLJB CEO?
yep. i'm a sulja refugee.
banned once for posting DNS info which indicated that Sulja's supposedly affiliated companies "Vista Group" and "Consultech" apparently own & operate some Canadian gay marriage web-biz.
then banned again for posting factual info from the NASD regarding the company's IR "professional."
if suppressing info was indicia of a good stock, SLJB might be the MOAB.
hey serf,
just because you can't find it, doesn't mean it exists!
or something like that, according to suljazoid "logic."
OT: if that NASD brokercheck report was posted publicly yesterday, you have my apology.
i didn't see it posted anywhere publicly.
do you realize that you are among the many here who have blatantly violated iHub's TOS tonight?
Yes or No?
audited results by PWC and/or KPMG that are consistent with what has been represented on the company's website would shut me up.
will we see that?
market seems to be discounting that heavily IMO.
so now they are a dotcom?
or a dotbiz, actually.
my earlier impressions are not consistent with my current impressions.
wasn't aware of the machiavellianism.
whatever.
you mean like that Intellius search from 3 weeks ago?
now i "committed a crime IMO."
LMAO!
actually it would seem that a large number of attacking posters have that perspective, not me.
who really cares what tucows' servers names are?
the fact remains that they are the registrar of record & their whois data represents that consultech has owned that particular domain since Dec. 2, 2004.
nothing more. nothing less.
TO DA MOON!
i've known about rrufff since around 1998.
read more carefully.
i was using a rhetorical device to demonstrate how some of the board "elder" claim to possess validating info, but they keep it to themselves for whatever reason.
i didn't claim it was their registered name server.
it looks to me like it is a server on their internal network.
doesn't mean anything to me.
fact is that the records of DNS registrar tucows indicate that consultech owns that website.
the "nucows" in nucows.tucows is likely a server name IMO
see, there's nothing to worry about.
all is well.
that's probably just a server name.
yep, and they planned it all a year and a half in advance.
well before Sulja was even a public company.
yep, that makes sense!
maybe it's one of the Village People?
essss-elllll-jay-beee
it's fun to own the stock
essss-elllll-jay-beee-eee-eee
start here Josh:
http://www.google.com/search?as_q=tucows&num=100&hl=en&btnG=Google+Search&as_epq=&am...
there's only about 14 million pages related to tucows.
yep, find & post the truth.
or at least as much as my time & resources will permit.
are you kidding me?
what would you suggest, conceal it from the public?
aren't the little peon retail shareholders worthy of knowing everything they can about this company?
the "disruptive posting" originated with all the noodniks who falsely accused me instead of independently confirming or refuting the relevant info i posted about a business apparently owned by Vista.
it's not my fault Vista seemingly owns a gay marriage website.
not that there's anything wrong with that!
btw, Twoggle
is this one of their, ahem, KORE competencies?
facts bother you too, huh?
"he's outright lying in an attempt to deface the company."
mmmmm-hmmmm.