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.
New Custodian Ventures petition at Clark County, A-18-780769-P, Nimtech Corp.
Well that's awkward. Seems they just up and dissolved.
https://www.nvsos.gov/SOSEntitySearch/CorpDetails.aspx?lx8nvq=Forcvwg3OdsI1LIdgaDveA%253d%253d&nt7=0
Well that's awkward. Seems they just up and dissolved.
https://www.nvsos.gov/SOSEntitySearch/CorpDetails.aspx?lx8nvq=Forcvwg3OdsI1LIdgaDveA%253d%253d&nt7=0
Surprised there wasn't more SRCP interest today. Revived after this many years and has less than 4M A/S. Oh well.
Wrong entity. That one was just set up a month ago.
It was bugging me that OCEL strongly rang a bell for some reason but I just couldn't put my finger on why. Maybe I should have looked at my very own spreadsheet - the one I made to track these things, duhhh.
Nodummy caught it - XTC already got OCEL custodianship, A-18-777044-P.
D'OH!
I like them too. ;)
They're not visible but they do exist. When they match up a sale goes through.
Step one would be understanding what accumulated deficit is. And accordingly what it isn't.
Hint: it's not what you seem to think it is.
And comments regarding lack of website updates and lack of restructuring press releases just reinforces my opinion that one may have no grasp of what is actually transpiring with LVCA here in 2018.
No offense intended, but I think some research is in order.
Is that where the CE came from?
So annoying seeing a CE and having no idea why or when it was applied. Or am I missing a resource that provides that info?
A new date has been set, 9/4.
It didn't even exist at the start of this morning's trading session. So there's that little fact to keep in mind when complaining about not having been notified of it the day before.
RGLG Arcaro custodianship filed today
Take a look at yesterdays trades. There were folk that got in early before news was widespread. They have been taking profit. Perhaps flipping their whole stash, perhaps selling enough to leave them with freeriding shares going forward.
Many folk just don't have the patience to wait out the custodianship process.
A-18-778631-P
It doesn't appear to be Arcaro in this one.
The news broke pretty late today, probably more eyes will be on it tomorrow. It'll be interesting to see the action, for sure.
And yeah, I'm digging the SS.
Different company.
I would love to know how that was found as well. BTW, the Initial Appearance Fee Disclosure was signed by Richard Chiang.
That's the Registered Agent, not a company officer.
My guess would be this WY entity: https://wyobiz.wy.gov/Business/FilingDetails.aspx?eFNum=167174112001225168189086191018043191187020164121
Formed a month ago. No officer is named unfortunately.
Seems to be a new player to me, Corporate Compliance LLC. The Initial Appearance Fee Disclosure was signed by Richard Chiang.
Please provide DD.
Oh, so the fourth was BTHI you say? Well, that's odd. BTHI was not an Arcaro ticker at all.
Thank you for confirming that it was pure exaggeration what with lumping in another ticker that didn't actually belong.
Funny story - there are a bunch of Arcaro tickers that have never been suspended at all. Incidentally, they all have something in common. They were not Palewater/Milost. What are the odds?
WSML, CYPE and AXMP. What is the fourth that is being bandied about?
Which four then? I only see three. I'm obviously missing one. That, or the number of Arcaro suspensions is being exaggerated.
Which is it? Am I mistaken? I'm happy to be corrected.
Which four, please? And I see other post-Arcaro tickers that seem to be entirely untouched by suspensions. How is that explainable?
Four, wow. Which tickers? Did they have anything in common?
I would venture yes. Reinstated and with new management.
Take a look at the Minutes from 7/18:
After reviewing the pleadings, authorities, and exhibits therein, this court finds this case would be properly litigated in specialty court due to its claims and controversies regarding business matters as defined by EDCR 1.61(a)(1), matters in which the primary claims or issues are based on, or will require decision under NRS Chapters 78-92A. Therefore, pursuant to EDCR 2.49, the COURT ORDERS case A-17-765376-C be sent to Master Calendar for random reassignment to an appropriate business/specialty court for determination as to whether the matter should be handled on the specialty docket. The hearing on this matter set for August 1, 2018 at 9:00 a.m. in Department IV is hereby VACATED.
New officer listed at NVSOS, Damu Lin. He's listed as an officer for several other NV entities, perhaps one of those is our merger?
The most interesting one seems to be Aqueous International Corporation, https://www.aqueousic.com/. Aqueous International Corporation is a company that specializes in real estate holdings, business opportunities and consulting services specific to the cannabis industry.
I could of course be wrong.
Since 2016.
Thank you for the informative reply.
Please disregard below if already seen before, albeit with a minor change for some reason or other.
****************************************************************************
Thank you for providing that link. Appreciated.
That's an interesting little situation. So it seems the CTO, dated 12/10/14, was issued based on one single bullet point:
¶ 2 Laredo Resources Corp. has not filed:
1. a Form 51-102F2 Annual Information Form for the year ended August 31, 2014, as
required under section 5(c) of MI 51-105
(the required records).
Actually, one can make stuff up.
Take for example the claim that LRDR has a Canadian cease trade order in effect against it.
In the past I have always seen those on the ticker's OTCM News page. Yet one does not exist for LRDR. https://www.otcmarkets.com/stock/lrdr/news
Is there any actual source for a cease trade on LRDR? I've asked the same question previously and never received any reply whatsoever.
So it seems that yes, one CAN MAKE THIS STUFF UP!
Got any SRBT links, references, sources for claimed legal actions?
Why not provide them?
Technically speaking, those are "disclosures" at OTCM and not "filings". Everybody knows what you mean but if there is any negative angle at all that can be pursued, well, it gets pursued.
HKWO - I wonder why they have been keeping it somewhat up to date with NV over the years but nothing with SEC? Weird.
This is now grey sheet trading. There is no Bid/Ask. It's blind matched trades now.
If someone's Buy price matches someone else's Sell price then a trade goes through.
Watch the Times and Sales that are occurring. Nothing to do with the Bid/Ask displayed, those are meaningless now.