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.
Longer than 4 trading sessions huh , how do you untrade a Grey,
Grey market huh? thats not as bad as the spill ,but anyway how do you untrade a Grey
They could , nevermind that , PSC wrote this" If the SEC finds that the company was 100% correct with their press releases, we will all be fine and we should do very well as shareholders. PSC hopes and expects that ACLH will be found to be in the right."
"we will all be fine " what are they taking about ?
When they find one , if you ask me they should do a daily check on all of them , clear every pr thru the sec .
I havent been thru the "suspending the trading for 10 days " with SEC before ,or enough times to agree or disagree with what will happen , they could even reinstate trading before the 10 days.
THE power of the SEC and pinks and rules is unkown to most , and no way to read the book of rules , written by the sec , except experience .
So what else is new .
Suspending , thats the word , for 10 days , thats the best info , SO FAR
DOW JONES NEWSWIRES
The Securities and Exchange Commission suspended trading in penny stock ACT Clean Technologies Inc. (ACLH) for 10 trading days
They did update , i dont know anything other than whats been released.
Thats about what i said , I thought about the same . They even updated with a pr.
PSC spoke to our contact in regards to ACLH and their claims in their press releases. Our contact checked with ACLH on two separate occasions today and they assured him that their PRs were 100% factual.
We know this is a difficult time for members holding ACLH and we will update members if we hear anything from our contact or any other source.
The value of our investment is in the hands of the SEC now and we look to their decision and the resumption of trading.
They said resume trading , not resume trading on the gray market. That's all im saying, why upset anyone now anyway.
From PSC , looks like back to pink trading on june 9 or sooner ( all things considered , the update for the complaints the SEC had )
This post was put on IHUB in regards to ACLH.
May 25th, 2010
Posted in Daily Alerts | Tags: ACLH
This post was put on IHUB in regards to ACLH.
VERY IMPORTANT POST, IMO.
I just completed a half hour call with Glenn Andrews, president of LEFT BEHIND RECOVERY, LLC .
He was kind enough to respond to my voicemail and he told me the following:
He was assured by the principals of ACLH, Kidder, Anderson and Shipley that ACLH and their attorney had a two hour phone meeting with the SEC this morning.
During that meeting the attorney furnished the SEC with answers and documentation that ACLH
believes satisfies the SEC’s expressed concerns that led to the suspension in trading.
Including:
1. Tests were conducted by BP
2. Results were reported as favorable by BP
3. Documentation to that effect was furnished to SEC.
That is all that Andrews knows. Because of what he was assured he does NOT feel that the
stock will be adversely effected when it resumes trading. That’s HIS opinion. The joint
venture remains unaffected by this SEC issue.
(Andrews also assured me that “Kidder was blindsided by the SEC question” on the radio interview and that
Kidder received notification of the suspension in an email after the question had been asked.
We’re looking at about 8:20 PDT for that email. Take it or leave it.)
Neither Andrews nor I know whether or not the SEC can or must lift suspension before the specified
period if documentation satisfies their concerns.
Now, please understand that this is the extent of my conversation with Mr. Andrews and there is nothing I can add
no matter how may questions any of you post. And no, I will not share his cell # for the simple reason that
I don’t want him besieged with phone calls from ACLH investors who he won’t be able to say anything more to than
he said to me..
I asked him if he would give me a call if he learned anything further that was not PR’d by ACLH. he indicated that
he would do so.
Sure, I’m skeptical about ACLH after the disastrous CC’s and the suspension of trading. But I do feel somewhat
better after the phone conversation indicating that an ACLH attorney is communicating with the SEC.
Andrews is NOT a shareholder, but he “has a direct line to Kidder” and he has no impression or
evidence that the situation is other than described to him and recounted by me.
As of now, trading will be allowed to resume on June 9.
The sec added that at the bottom , looks like from their pr they are satified with the update.
Was the stock halted for 10 days then said to return on a said day like this , this is very specific and the SEC also said they corrected, for lack of a better word , the problem they had with it .
So someone called then, probably so, to have it checked out.
They already seemed to correct the reason the SEC had , should return to pinks .
End of story i hope. thanks for the info.
Everyones question is how the SEC came across ACLH to scrutinize it.
EPA (is checking into everything that might help now that the people are so pissed)
webmasters ,
Accuracy and profided data is there only reason .
and finally the Coast guard and govt are getting touchy about the public wanting someone else to take over BP , and BP is the largest oil producer in the US and 30% of the oil comes from the gulf .
maybe the epa told the sec that told aclh to be more accurate and provide data.
Beginning in 1989 (the year of the spill) I (repost from internet , personal account , not mine)worked half a dozen or so different vessels through out Prince William Sound from Valdez to Cordova to Whittier. Most of what I did in 89 was support, but also I understood that Exxon had begun spraying test sites on Knight Island with Inipol EAP 22 and Corexit to see the effects on oily beaches and to see if indeed spraying chemicals would be more effective than the hot water spraying that was going on everywhere in the summer of 89.
One question that puzzles me is: did Exxon take into consideration the effects on the people that would be working with these chemicals? Did they have a long or even short term health monitoring system in operation to treat exposed workers? The answer is a flat "NO" There was more concern for the wild life habitat than that of humans working with untested chemicals. * Please do not take me in the wrong context for I am a very firm believer in all animal and environmental issues, I would not have worked the oilspill for three years in a row if I did not believe that I could make a difference.
In the Spring of 1990 I joined several survey teams in Prince William Sound to see the effects of what the Winter storms had on the oily beaches. It was my conclusion that the Winter storms did more of a cleanup than all the hot water spraying in the late summer of 1989 did, believe me, I feel that Mother Nature takes care of her own quite well, of course as I have stated before that's my own assessment. In May of 1990 I slipped on some oily rocks and shattered my right knee and was side lined from the oil spill cleanup, but not for long. In June I returned to Prince William Sound with a leg brace and continued working the oilspill on board the Landing Craft Pegasus * * as a pilot. The Pegasus had a very large tank of Inipol EAP 22 on her deck, just how many gallons I don't recall.
But let's back up for a second. During the surveys and shortly thereafter there was a berthing vessel in Bay of Isles, Knight Island called the M/V Columbia. * What's interesting about this is the M/V Columbia had her own fresh water salization system. This is all fine and dandy, except for one thing, just a stone's throw away from where the M/V Columbia was anchored Exxon was spraying Inipol 22 all over the beaches, which at high tide went into the water and eventually into the water system of the M/V Columbia. Now my question is does a salization system filter out chemicals? I think not.
At any rate on board the Pegasus as I stated before we had a very large tank of Inipol 22 that we used to supply beach workers: they had back packs full of Inipol 22 that they used to spray beaches, we also supplied pontoon * * vessels with Inipol 22. Exxon's main objective in 1990 was to spray chemicals all over Prince William Sound and the Kenai Peninsula, and this we all did.
The important thing to note here is that Exxon never trained anyone, well at least not anyone directly associated with the transporting or spraying of Inipol 22. We were told by Exxon that Inipol 22 was as safe as honey on toast which is why once the transferring and spraying started there were no Exxon supervisors to be found anywhere. Now on this web site there're photos of beach workers spraying beaches; no real protection is being used, why? Because none was issued.
A little pressure on brian or mac to let us know something would be nice
ITs been about 6 mos since they posted the DOD fuel on MEG .
1) they could have been awarded the contract when MEG added to prod strat.( it was probably applied for 12 mos before that .)
2) july we start shipping.
3) wont know for sure until a pr , announcement from DOD , or maybe a phone call from Brian or MAC .
4) just hope BEGIN means BEGIN this time
IF They cap the well with top kill /PSC said they would explode with remediation.
Thanks diamndron , mac has had vendor apps in as far back as 2 or more years from what dragonwing and others found. So we are still unkowning of what is going on behind the scenes, because of the lag time .
It was still nice to see the vendor list from the dod and time of contract in connection with MEG stating BEGIN DOD FUEL SHIPMENTS IN JUNE.
local officials continue to hammer BP and the federal agencies responding to the Gulf of Mexico oil spill, repeatedly threatening to “take matters into our own hands” if the response falls short, BP said Monday morning that it was further delaying its next attempt to shut off the leak.
On Saturday, the tensions between BP and local authorities came to a boiling point in Jefferson Parish, when local officials declared they were going to commandeer 40 boats of fishermen who had signed up to help with the spill but had since remained idle. They had spotted oil moving past the shoreline beaches through passes into Barataria Bay, which is surrounded by wildlife-rich wetlands.
“BP was not acting quickly enough in getting the skimmers and the booming boats out,” said Thomas Capella, a Jefferson Parish councilman. “If they weren’t going to do it, we’re going to do it ourselves.”
There is proof they are on the vendor candidate list for a DOD contract, whether they got it or are going to get it is the question .
I would think they would need 6 mos to set up everything so a vendor should have the contract by now to begin fuel delivery by july , they did say start fuel shipments in june but synj hasnt been so accurate .
would be nice
clueless about cutting off the flow.(may 14
"We don't have any idea how to stop this," Simmons said. The former banker mocked a proposal to try and plug the leak with trash, saying it was a "joke."
Simmons noted that the pressure at 5,000 feet undersea -- where the well site is located -- is so high, that containment efforts are likely often to fail. At 5,000 feet underwater, blocking elements have to be able to hold even with pressures off 40,000 pounds per square inch.
Incoming American Association of Petroleum Geologists chief David Resink says the oil reservoir that is feeding the spill is colossal.
Story continues below...
"You're talking about a reservoir that could have tens of millions of barrels in it," Resink said. At the current spill rate, it "would take years to deplete," he added.
EPA pressure could explode , BP could do rush of contracts for new cleanup products and of course ACLH testing requested could be in normal channnels to be bought by BP , even Florida could purchase it for preventive measures , I would as govt spending. To protect the tourism rev, the other should too
The vendor dod contract says starting July , now i have a question someone might know.
The dod announces dod contracts , does it follow the period to start , if not and its to begin shipping in july the contract would have to been awarded months ago to prep for it. probably not able to annnounce by vendor until dod annnounces .
Anyone on that list listed elsewhere for a dod contract?
oil has washed up on about 65.6 miles of shoreline, about 25 of which are easily cleanable, Landry said.
Landry and Thad ALLEN may be at blame for not forcing BP to use cleanup products
Thats the faith that keeps me running . Stocks with a lot higher o/s are running up on a lot less than could happen here , just cant give up the faith , it will happen.
Contracts with ACLH is getting better and better .It seems dismal because they havent yet , but I think thats the nature of this game. BP should have had ACLH working with the coast guard from DAY one . THAT would have been nice for the safety of the coastline , that would have shown they cared for what had to be done , and respect the lousiana coast, fisherman and wildlife .
BP had no respect for the gulf coast , shoreline , wildlife , fish life , peoples lives .
when it all comes down too it , your probably right .
the fact remains their is more oil out there and all products like aclh' cleaning hulls , spraying beaches , using less toxic disperants and a whole ton of other things still could be put in to effect this very sec and wont be /or havent been .
The oil should have never hurt the coastline as it did with what out there to stop it .
EPA is the man in charge and they did nothing and finally the pres did nothing to make the EPA do something .
FUNDS from every state or federal emergency fund could have been used to get the products on the beaches after a few days of this .and honest evals of the spill could of had every vessel in the states there trying to pick it up , thousands of vessels should be out there as per an idea of what i mean.
To the gulf states: buy your own products and now and fast . Save your own.BP had big losses , a rig like that and the revenue flow.ITS prudent and wisely cuthroat as a company to not spent a cent right now , for anything , to recover , all aside thats it , STATES arent doing enough internally and spend a few billion on the hull cleanup and spraying the beaches , anything would be worth , be defensive against the worst , of oil thet will reach the coast , wakeup louisiana, florida , ala, texas.
then hope the govt and EPA wake up and force more cleanup nd prevention . this is in prevention mode till the last drop disapates or is picked up , its really a shame .
easy to say now , STATES there in the gulf, LA, should buy the products themslves and save there coast.LA should buy ACLH products now to cleann hulls , spray the beaches , as should the rest , Florida, personally its a shame for the wildlife and fisherman' , eco system ,i have aheart for that and im not even a environmentalist. Its bad . do not like seeing it .
After seeing nothing by BP was being done to protect the coast, wildlife , BP philosophy from begginiing was it was nothing it will disperse in the water and just went after visible oil on the surface .
BP never gave a dam
If Florida wants to regard Grand Isle as a laboratory to study the effects on tourism from that dark swill vomiting up from the wreckage of the Deepwater Horizon, early indications look damn near fatal. Grand Isle's mayor closed the beach Friday afternoon but his order was not much more than an empty gesture. An obvious question hung over a mostly empty strand: Closed to whom?
Read more: http://www.miamiherald.com/2010/05/22/1642867/bp-oil-spill-a-deadly-brown-beach.html#ixzz0ogPixQwt
Got off topic there , Serranno is behind Madrid.
Does the unlimited financing for the DOD , from the DOD?
ONE missing link is the revenue to company breakdown of what company is connected to the other company , its really a maze , noone can figure it out from available data. MEG is consulting as a minority owned company then passes the project over to synj to be theirs. Thats about as far as i can take it .
ACLH products clean hulls better than water , it collects the oil, not return to the ocean , and spraying the beaches makes smart sense too.Aclh ' products should be employed from the beginning.
I cant understand BP not doing all they can for the people of the gulf , they are getting screwd by BP, and the EPA for allowing to go on this or that way. Hate to see that oil muck there on everything .
What a mess , it aint BULLY for the BRITISH.
ACLH products clean hulls better than water , it collects the oil, not return to the ocean , and spraying the beaches makes smart sense too.
I cant understand BP not doing all they can for the people of the gulf , they are getting screwd by BP, and the EPA for allowing to go on this or that way. Hate to see that oil muck there on everything .
What a mess , it aint BULLY for the BRITISH.
"He added that BP was continuing to look for other dispersants in the wake of EPA's directive that it apply less toxic kinds to break up the spill."
Talk about jiggy , more like skiddish over a CC
EPA is just putting the screws to BP for cleanup / prevention , SO contracts for products and non toxic will happen next week beginnining ,
A month too late , a well that big with a nonoperational preventer , BP are dumb , should have blown the well or cappped it immediately withaout a backup preventer plan .
I realize their is a lot of expectations for ACLH and BP , and quickly