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.
paige, sorry to disappoint you, but I still am a Loch shareholder, and this is a Loch Harris message board.
paige, if you take a little time, you will realize that the board you are referring to was born on March 1, 2001, that is, almost 2 and a half years ago. I have serious doubts that you actually bothered to read much of what I posted over the years, otherwise you would know what was going on at that time, and what was mine and everyone esles expectations. I never was nor will ever be a religious fanatic. If I mentioned scripture in my posts was because I expressed my beliefs. If I discontinued to do so, it was for respect towards many posters that felt somewhat disturbed by my expression of faith. But my beliefs are just as strong today as they were then. You say that I make people upset? Why? Because I have a diferent opinion on things, than others do? I respect anyones right to freely express their opinions, even when I disagree. And when I do, I respond with my opinion in a civil and respectful manner. Do I have to hate everyone that do not agree with me? Never. I don't expect anyone to agree with my opinion, I simply express it the way I see it and understand it. I may be wrong, I may be right, but that is who I am, and adjusting my thinking to the likening of others would make me a hypocrite. For 18 years of my life I had to bite my tongue every time I wanted to express my opinion, for fear of persecution, imprisonment and even death. Not anymore. I paid a very high price for my right to be free.
You say that I have spread negativeness about our company? Tell me one positive thing that can be said about Loch Harris and its directors.
You are very quick to judge me by the amount of shares I have. Do you have any idea what I paid for them? Do you have any idea where the bulk of my investment is? Do you have any idea how many companies I am invested in? You don't. So, your judgment is very limited and certainly off base.
You are telling me to go play on my board and build it up? well, I don't play on boards, and posters build a board up. You are welcome to join and be part of it.
JH, so, you are judging me for what I might have done, not for what I have done (or didn't do, fot that matter)? And you say that doing something within the frame of the law, would be criminal?
You say that my actions "could have" cost 1900 shareholders their life savings? Who in his right mind would place his life savings in the very volatile, unpredictable penny stock market? The very first rule of investing is: "never invest money that you are not prepared to lose". Placing your life saving in a single basket, and specially in a very risky one is, at best irrespopnsible, if not stupid.
It's really interesting to see how much you (and others) still try to blame me for something that didn't happen. Why is it that, rather than discharging so much anger and frustration against me, you all don't celebrate your victory and rejoice in the wonderful opportunity that you all have in recovering your investment and even make some money? You all got what you wanted but behave as if you are not happy with what you got. Is it my fault too? Your insecurity, insatisfaction, fear and anxiety is showing through and of course, let's blame it all on lmorovan.
I am a Loch Harris shareholder, who posts his opinions on a Loch Harris Message Board, within the limits of civility and respect. Many opinions expressed on this board are diferent as each poster is diferrent. I may have some opinions that other posters may not agree with, but that does not make me a criminal. The reason of the message boards is to exchange opinions and ideas and have a constructive discussion about the issues that are of our interest. No one should be deprived of his right to freely express an opinion as long as it is done in a civil and constructive manner.
Rio, my web site does not promote anything, does not sell anything, does not offer any products or services. Why should be there any disclaimer? I think you might be the only one who cannot read the name on the diplomas, and if you really are sooooo interested in what they say, don't take my word for it, find someone to translate them for you and dream about exposing me as a fake. You don't have to believe what I say, but at least believe what you see. Or perhaps you cannot even see right.
About my posts, I wrote all and every single one of them, and modesty appart, I am very proud of them. I showed everyone that if I put enough effort into achieving a better understanding of the English language, the results will become evident.
Now, if you are so skeptic about my web site, does that apply to CDEX web site too? Or you take everything in there as a gospel? Are you curious to find out whether what is posted there is true or false? You were one of the strongest critics of Malcolm Philips and called him all kinds of names, questioning even his Christian principles. Now you have become his strongest defender. What did you learn about him that changed your position 180 degrees? Were you deceptive then or you are now?
You bragg so much of having your roots in the craddle of Democracy and you are practicing everything but Democracy. Who is the hypocrite here?
I have never seen a web site where the company brings out any negative issues about its operations, personnel, products, management, history or anything else. It is perfectly understandable and a very common practice. Selective disclosure on a web site is not illegal. After all, who would say anything about himself that would scare away potential customers. That is precisely the reason everything on the site should be taken cautiously. There is always another side of the story, that usually is kept hidden.
What we learned about Loch Harris and its directors, we learned from many sources other than their web site. Anyone who would have read Loch web site up until it was taken down, was all good, all promising, and convincing enough as to make us all invest our money in. Time and personal DD showed us a completely different picture. And still, so many of us refused to believe all the red flags that were being raised. We have perfected a sense of blaiming others of trying to hurt our investment and bring the company down. We refused to see the evidence that was right before our eyes. And we got hurt. Royally, and willingly. And even after the whole truth has been exposed, we still look for someone or something to blame, other than ourselves.
Will this happen with CDEX too? Is our greed so strong that we are insulated from the truth?
Happy Birthday CDEX.
Clinton_Harold, it might help you if you read again the Asset Purchase Agreement and using simple adition, find out how many shares were distributed or assigned to different parties.
JH, you already have lost everything in exchange for empty promises and non enforceable court orders. Those who were wise enough as to opt out or close their position in Loch have at least a chance to reinvest whatever money is left in other stocks, and recover this way their losses. Time will tell who was right and who was wrong. In the meantime, pointing fingers will not solve anything. I will appreciate if you cease to imply that my action was wrong, without any facts to prove your point other than pure speculation.
In the meantime, CDEX will still have to prove that the means through which it had acquired the technology from Loch Harris were correct and legal. That will surely take us back to the Asset Purchase Agreement.
Again, things are not as rosy as so many try to paint them.
tjfitz, yes, I am one of those who opted out, but there are many more in the same position. It is possible that he was talking about me, but then, he could have been talking about any other person in the same position. He did not mention any person in particular.
tjfitz, as an average, a SEC investigation can go between 2 to 2 1/2 years, depending on the complexity of the case. I believe both the company and their directors are being investigated, not only by the SEC, but also by the FBI and the DOJ. Apparently, many aspects that we are not aware of in detail, but that may involve transfer of assets to off shore bank accounts and investment companies, as well as connection with money loundering and South American ventures are also in the play. It is, in my opinion, highly improbable that Loch will be able to dissolve before all investigations are complete.
JH, do you know who those who have no interest in CDEX are? I know about 8 presons that opted out, 3 longs with substantial amount of shares that have closed their position and about a dozen that were saying they were bailing out too. Perhaps you know of a few more?
tjfitz, it makes sense, since CDEX does not have much, if any, shares left for Private Placements, and if MP will need more working capital, he will rather increase the issued shares and perform a forward split, allowing more Private Placement investors to get aboard at attractive prices. It's easier to find investors to pay $.50 per shares than $2.50. Most likely the contract money ($200,000) will be eaten up by administrative expenses and overdue salaries. And CDEX will not see the $800,000 before showing some factual and validated proof of the viability of the technology before the Navy would invest that money into. It's a wait and see game, and, in my opinion, things are not as rosy as some try to paint them.
The moment your broker submits the Claim Form, no more purchases of Loch shares are eligible for the exchange of CDEX shares. Each broker may chose a different time to submit the Claim Form, therefore, the best way to know whether your porchase of Loch shares still qualify is to get in contact to your broker.
Anyone who claims otherwise is spreading misinformation.
Loch - Bid .025, Ask .032
Thanks rio and Clinton for confirming that this is still a Loch board.
Rio, I thought this ia a board where long shareholders can freely discuss matters related to our investment, in a civil and constructive way. I was never told that there will be censorship here.
If your concern right now is CDEX, then I believe the place where to discuss CDEX is on the CDEX board. Loch is not history yet, it is still a trading company, very much related to our investment, and will continue to be so until it is dissolved.
It is my understanding that your duty as Board moderator is to ensure a civil and respectful exchange of opinions and ideas. Censorship and/or discrimination are not helping anyone.
Rio, all opinions expressed on this or any other message boards are just that: OPINIONS. When they are backed up by documented proof, they become facts. I thought you knew that.
Rio, I got it and that's why I provide documented facts for my claims. But seems like others don't get it, including yourself.
Bitbull, yes, Art should know that. But I will continue to post information, regardless of whether it is solicited or not.
NRS 78.590 Trustees of dissolved corporation: Powers of directors.
1. Upon the dissolution of any corporation under the provisions of NRS 78.580, or upon the expiration of the period of its corporate existence, limited by its articles of incorporation, the directors become trustees thereof, with full power to settle the affairs, collect the outstanding debts, sell and convey the property, real and personal, and divide the money and other property among the stockholders, after paying or adequately providing for the payment of its liabilities and obligations.
This is an obligation that the directors are acquiring with a District Court in the State of Nevada where the dissolution is filed. Texas Court (or Judge Keel, for that matter) has no say in this phase of the dissolution process.
Art, OK. You don't want to have a civil discussion, I will not respond.
No Art, the Court cannot Order the dissolution of Loch Harris. The Court can only approve Loch's request for dissolution only when and after the exchange is totally completed. Once and if the Court approves it, Loch will start the process of dissolution in a district Court in Nevada. From the moment Judge Keel approves the dissolution, the case is completely closed and archived, since that is the last action the Final Judgment provides for.
Art, there is available to all, the Nevada Statutes and Regulations where the issue of the dissolution of companies is described as well as the rule that allows companies to use up to two years to complete the dissolution. What I said is based on known and publicly available facts. Read them, learn them, and then come back and support or refute my statement.
And don't start with twisting your own words and quoting yourself out of context. Or is that your new writing style?
Now, I will call again for civil and constructive discussion. See if you can comply, please.
Art, did you back up your statement: "But I know of nothing that says you would not get CDEX share eligibility with shares of LOCH purchased now."
well, I know nothing that says you will not be able to trade Loch shares all the way until the dissolution is consumated. And the dissolution may take up to two years from the moment it is sanctioned by the Court, or better yet, from the moment the request for dissolution is submitted to the Nevada State Securities Administration.
scarednomore, it all depends of the day your broker tabulates Loch accounts, fills the Claim Form and send it to the Transfer Agent. From that moment on, all trades in Loch will no longer qualify for the exchange. Given that not all brokers will send in the Claim Forms at the same time, it is impossible to know which one still trades Loch with CDEX attached to them and which ones don't. Best bet is to call the broker and request a written statement informing you the date it intends to send in the Form and that all trades before that date will be included in the Claim, therefore, will qualify for the exchange. Keep in mind though, that brokers may continue to trade Loch shares even after submitting the Claim Form, but those trades will no longer qualify for the exchange. On the same token, also keep in mind that Loch shares may be tradable all the way until the dissolution is consumated, that is up to two years after the dissolution request is OKd by the Court.
Rio, why should a brokerage house stop trading a stock that is registered and has a market?
The Honorable Patrick O. Keel
P.O. Box 1748
1000 Guadalupe
Suite 514
Austin, Texas 78767
Phone: (512) 854-9374
Fax: (512) 854-9332
June 24, 2003,
Your Honor,
It is my duty as shareholder of Loch Harris, to inform you of the fact that, once again, Loch Harris Inc. and its Directors have failed to comply and/or fulfill their fiduciary duties, by neglecting to incorporate in the 8-K form submitted to the Securities and Exchange Commission, a specific Date of Record. The absence of said Date of Record has caused and continues to cause uncertainty among shareholders of Loch Harris.
I understand that the Court has issued the following:
"118. After entry of this Final Judgment, to alleviate potential confusion in the
market, Loch Harris shall promptly file a Form 8-K with the S.E.C. to reflect the
following: This Court recommends that all persons stop trading in Loch Harris stock beginning on a date three weeks (i.e., 21 calendar days) after entry of this Final Judgment, at 5:00 p.m. Pacific Time; and that after that date and time, brokers may or may not possess or be able to acquire shares that traders seek to buy or sell. Thus, any attempts to trade after that date and time might not be consummated; and traders and their brokers who undertake to conduct such trades do so at their peril."
It is, however, the Company’s responsibility to set a specific Date of Record, to signal the last trading day that Loch Harris shares can be purchased and still be eligible for the exchange. This information must have been included in the last 8-K form. Not doing so is creating a state of chaos and misunderstanding among shareholders.
I respectfully request that the issue aforementioned be addressed and remedied at the earliest time possible.
Thank you very much for your attention,
Liviu Morovan
xc:
Ms. Amalia Rodriguez-Mendoza,
Via FAX: 512-854-4744
Mr. Scott A. Kamber, Attorney,
Via FAX: 212-753-3630
Mr. Cliffor A. Cantor, Attorney,
Via FAX: 425-868-7870
Mr. John Courtade, Attorney,
Via FAX: 512-502-1138
Mr. Frank Arnold, Attorney
Via FAX: 512-306-7371
Mr. Donald R. Taylor, Attorney,
Mr. Miguel S. Rodriguez, Attorney,
Via FAX: 512-478-4409
Rio, brokerage houses will start gathering the information of all of their Loch Harris accounts and will block those accounts for the purpose of filling the Claim Form. But it is my understanding that, as long as Loch Harris is not halted officially from trading, anyone could still trade the stock, of course without being included in the Claim Form and not elligible for the exchange.
No, GQ, that is not right. We all know when is the last day the certificates must be in the Transfer Agent's office. But we don't know the last day to buy Loch shares and still qualify for the exchange. That is just another (in my opinion) omission of the Boys, intentional or not. The information about a specific DOR should have been included in the last 8-K submitted to the SEC.
"4 days left to buy LOCH and receive CDEX shares!" You don't know that Rio. Unless there is a specific Date of Record, nobody knows what the final day to buy Loch and qualify for the exchange is.
scarednomore, I will not engage in personal exchanges with you or anyone. And I will take any derogatory comments against me as personal attacks and/or harrassment. So, please, let's try to be civil here and have some constructive discussion.
scarednomore, your post is provocative and does not bring any constructive discussion, so I will refuse to engage with you in a confrontation. Just one comment: no one wanted the Settlement Agreement but the exchange. And you all agreed to let those who stole your money for many years get away free and wealthy, in exchange for that. I did not want to be part of it. I fought against the injustice, not against the distribution or the shareholders. And, yes, I had all the right in the world to do what I did.
I hope and pray you all will get what you want.
caddor35, I am sorry, I cannot acommodate you, but this is a Loch Harris stock board and I am a Loch Harris investor. Just as you, or anyone else on this board, I have the right to freely express my opinion regarding my investment. I respect everyone's opinion, even as sometimes I disagree. Fortunately for many, the administrator of IHub believes in the freedom of speech, even if that bothers others. The presence and/or participation on this board is voluntary, so if you don't like it, you are welcome to leave.
scarednomore, what's wrong with asking questions when you don't know the answers? What's wrong with trying to understand what is going on, when what is going on is not clear?
Thank you for reminding me that the Judge has ruled already.
Art, doesn't it look a little suspicious that the Judge set a speciffic "Date of Exchange" and left somewhat vague the date when Loch shares should stop trading? Based on the Judge's ruling, all brokers and shareholders that hold certificates have the option to submit their documents 2 days before the "Date of Exchange". Was that an oversight of the Judge or it was intentional? Why didn't the Judge set the date of June 27 as the Date of Record, specifically? Food for thought...
Art, why shoud the trading be halted? You can't halt it just because, you need a good reason for doing so.
preen2222,
If your premise that the MMs are short is right, they have no reason or motivation to cover now. They can do it at their leasure after June 27, when the O/S will be reduced by 480 million. At that time they will have all incentives to raise the price and trade those shares that do not qualify for the exchange.
truth sets u free, thanks to Matt also.
Those who did not opt out will have their shares cancelled by the Transfer agent when he receives the Claims from the brokers. I believe that the warning from the Judge is for those shareholders that have agreed to the exchange. If they try to trade their shares, they may lose them and also lose their CDEX shares.