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.
That's very bullish of you, Bgold. If I may ask, what's your opinion on ACLH's outlook.
On a more serious note, anyone have any idea what is taking place with the company? Does someone want to call for updates on getting off the grey market?
I too am trying to approach this opportunity realistically. My greatest fear in purchasing more stock is the possible R/S. I lived and lost through the last one. But for clarification, you mentioned two R/S in one year. When did this take place...?
Greg, I enjoy reading your pragmatic posts on GERS. Wouldn't you expect if all this apparent dilution is really KK/Viridis buying shares in order to cancel them that GERS would promote this? It's one thing to state it's a "goal," and another to actually confirm that it's taking place right now. Doing so could only improve GERS' perception to new investors, and alleviate the concerns of current shareholders...
Even better question, with all the refineries coming online, and revenue streams flowing in, why do we have all the low-yielding dilution..? And why with all this really great news about patent allowances and lawsuit settlements are the MMs still posting .0001/.0002 bid/asks..? What, if anything, do they know that we don't..?
Yes, that is the share number I remember. Well, according to OTC Markets' data we're now at an outstanding share count of just over 13billion.
So if last year we had an R/S with 11.8 billion outstanding, how can we not presume that we're quickly heading towards another R/S? I contacted the Investor Relations office over two weeks ago asking if they could confirm the current authorized and outstanding share count...but no answer to date.
I'm questioning whether we "retail stockholders" are actually funding the debt conversions for the company's "insider stockholders" like YA Global, Viridis Capital, CA Ventures, JMJ Financial, etc. With all the recent great news, why are the MM's bid/ask still unchanged? I've seen a lot more than a few penny stock jump hundreds of percent on far less promising PR, why not GERS..? I got burned with last year's R/S and after investing another $2k thus far, I'm feeling uneasy with the recent water treading going on...
Does anyone recall what the number of outstanding shares were last year just before the R/S..?
You're correct that we shareholders really don't know what is really going on. However, I do know that cancellation of the 50million, or any shares for that matter, could only take place if it were sold back to GERS itself. Who else would have share cancellation authority?
As to YA Global selling its position for bottom dollar, this is conceivable if they were assured that billions more shares would subsequently be issued to them.
Telephone lines are back on. Sean answered the phone this morning and confirms the company is still in business.
"Our capital structure will be complicated by the convertible nature of our debt until it is repaid. Dilution resulting from the conversion of some of our debt into stock can be expected between now and full repayment. However, we are committed to minimizing the dilutive expense of these debt conversions."
No where within this commitment declaration, nor in the entirety of the Feb 07, 2011 letter to shareholders does KK exclude the possibility of a R/S after the "dilution resulting from the conversion of some of GERS debt into stock." The one reality I witnessed after last year's R/S, which took my 10million shares down to 1million, is that GERS was free to subsequently issue billions more shares to YA Global (financiers) and Viridis Capital (KK).
Now don't get me wrong...I believe in this company and its management/leadership. Nothing in life worth having is easy, right? So I figure if I have to evenually invest several thousand dollars in order to gain $million$ in return, so be it. But I'm not going to fool myself along the way...
Could someone with greater trading knowledge be able to describe what exactly we'd be witnessing if KK were buying back shares for subsequent cancellation?
I accept that at any time whatsoever KK will issue new shares its main debt holder, YA Global, as easily as he would to GERS' main capital investor, Viridis Capital. However is there a criteria available to determine if we're seeing a buy-back/cancellation or just more dilution leading to the inevitable R/S...?
Leach, I don't have anything else...
Having lost $50k I feel as if I've finally worked through all the stages of grief:
1. Denial;
2. Anger;
3. Bargaining;
4. Depression;
5. Acceptance
I have absolutely no expectations. I've accepted that I may never recover any of my investment. I'm determined to move on, and will no longer base my self-worth on whether this company and its management truly has my best interests in mind. I won't sell my shares anytime soon, just in case a miracle takes place. But based on Kidder's observable efforts over the past 10 months I hold no delusions as to the likelihood of ACLH's future.
Check out OTCmarkets.com. GERS is listed under OTCQB.
Could someone please explain the meaning of "unpriced quotes?" What's the significance considering we shareholders would like to see an uptick in bids/asks..?
Has anyone been able to buy at .0001...?
I use Zecco.com. Now until March 29, they charge $4.50 per trade, after March 30th it's up to $6.95 per trade. No monthly charges, minimums, and I've bought upwards of 5million shares at a time for only $4.50...
Skribe, if I may ask, what is your position in GERS?
Thanks.
I use Zecco Trading at zecco.com. $4.50 per electronic trade, no issues buying GERS.
If I may ask, Anony...what do your losses in ACLH total...??
I'm out of any further discussions of a class action. After a great deal of thought I just don't have the desire to prolong this unfortunate situation. If ACLH's management truly has the best intentions for its shareholders than maybe this stock will turn around. But it's obvious to me any actions, opinions, or good-will for that matter, that we've all shared since last May will have little effect on the eventual outcomes. That, for better or worse, we'll have to leave up to Kidder.
I wish everyone good luck with their future investments, and hope that we can all take the time to value our loved ones for the endless support and understanding they provide.
Can anyone describe the significance in the sharp drop of shares traded the past two days. After almost two weeks of 100 to 200 million-plus trades per day, we're now down to trading in the mid 20 mil.
I imagine GERS has ceased selling .00005 shares to market makers, so now what? What processes will take place if KK buys back those shares? What are his likely share prices paid; .0001 or .0002? Would GERS buy back directly from the same market makers they sold to? If such an arrangement takes place, wouldn't this further keep the share price down during this process?
Thanks, HotDog. What would be evident to shareholders (if anything) when and if KK moves towards cancellation of billions of shares. A press release? Form 8k? Wouldn't keeping shareholders updated on share cancellation be favorable to the share price? And then again, if he's still not committed to either share cancellation or R/S he wouldn't be saying anything,right..?
That question speaks to the legitimacy of ACLH's recovery efforts. NINE MONTHS after the SEC suspension we shareholders should have, at a minimum, been provided a detailed path forward. Instead, we received ONE update in SIX MONTHS that was as cryptic as the other TWO updates since the May 25, 2010 suspension. That's not very reassuring.
This article does impartially present GERS' COES system in a very favorable light, and is encouraging. The BIG question for me which pevents me from doubling my position is, What are the chances that KK will commit to another R/S instead of canceling the 10billion-plus shares diluted into the float? I lost significant value with the last R/S, and don't want to relearn that lesson....
A Breach of Fiduciary Duty
By: LawInfo
Published: 03/2009
Boards of Directors have legal, and arguably moral, responsibilities to the shareholders who depend on them to run a business. Those duties are called fiduciary duties and include the duties of care and loyalty. When a Board member breaches those duties and shareholders are harmed as a result the shareholders have the right to recover damages.
When A Breach of Fiduciary Duty Occurs
Before a plaintiff can recover damages for an alleged breach of fiduciary duty, a plaintiff must prove the elements of a breach of fiduciary duty case. Specifically, the plaintiff must prove that a fiduciary relationship existed between the plaintiff and the defendant. If the plaintiff is a shareholder in a company where the defendant is on the Board of Directors then this element of the case has likely been met. Next, the plaintiff must prove that the defendant breached his or her fiduciary duty. If, for example, the defendant acted on his own behalf and not in the best interest of the company or if the defendant failed to give proper consideration to a business decision then the defendant may have breached his or her duty of loyalty or duty of care. If this element of the case has been satisfied then the plaintiff must show that the defendant’s breach of his or her duty caused the plaintiff damage and the plaintiff must specify the nature and extent of his or her damages. So, for example, if the plaintiff is a shareholder in the company and the plaintiff can prove that the defendant’s actions caused the stock price to plummet then the plaintiff may have proven his or her damages. This is often the hardest part of the case for the plaintiff to prove since many factors can be involved in a decrease in stock price.
Possible Remedies for a Breach of Fiduciary Duty
The possible remedies for a breach of fiduciary duty lawsuit depend, in part, on state law. A plaintiff may recover for actual damages incurred and, in many states, the plaintiff can also recover for punitive damages, particularly if the plaintiff proves that the defendant’s breach was due to malice or fraud.
For many plaintiffs, and other people who are in a fiduciary relationship, one of the most important benefits of bringing a breach of fiduciary duty lawsuit is the deterrent effect it may have on Boards of Directors at other companies and on future Boards of Directors at the company involved in the lawsuit. With each lawsuit that is brought, other members of Boards of Directors may grow more aware of the possible damages that may be awarded against them and more careful in the exercise of their duties of loyalty and care.
I have uncovered information which will support and facilitate our claim again ACLH, CEO Kidder and the other Directors and Officers. But we must act now. I appreciate that a number of folks have responded to our roll call for participation in the class action, but no one is providing their email addresses. We can't organize our efforts if we don't communicate offline of Investors' Hub. Please provide your email addresses and I'll coordinate our efforts. And by now you all should know time is of the essence, and ACLH assets may soon be transfered to B@CL, and thereafter it will be difficult to achieve any recoveries.
Thanks.
I don't know what to think anymore. Needless to say, none of us really know what's going on. Months ago we're told that ACLH was undertaking oil well tests on Texas wells, and then nothing. But on B@CL's website there's a February 10, 2010 press release that states its wholly owned subsidiary, NuTech Energy, Inc. "has signed a non-binding letter of intent to acquire majority interests in five producting Texas oil wells." Further, the press release confirms, "NuTech Energy intends this proposed transaction to be the start of a program to acquire existing and marginal production oil wells and to use proprietary technology to improve the production of these wells."
So what's the "proprietary technology" that B@CL plans to use? Is it "Free Oil?" And if ACLH is the source of the proprietary technology, wouldn't you believe it would merit a press release by Kidder? What if, however, the proprietary technology will ultimately not be ACLH's?
It's not reassuring to ACLH shareholders that one of Shipley's boys might be using the other's product, and the company holding the patent doesn't PR the potential business. Why? Waiting to release the information once off the grey market? Progress over the past NINE MONTHS leads one to believe this is close to impossible. Perhaps who currently owns the patent to this proprietary technology is irrelevant, as patent ownership may change soon enough. One thing is certain though, B@CL is intent on using "proprietary technology" on Texas oil wells, and ACLH has nothing to say...
Why can't ACLH get involved in this...
http://finance.yahoo.com/news/New-drilling-method-opens-apf-2851595693.html?x=0&sec=topStories&pos=main&asset=&ccode=
One word pretty much sums it up: Dubious. At this point we shareholders must come to accept that anything written by us, or ACLH for that matter, is for no other purpose than to appease. But we can, and should, identify the factual information available with which we can achieve a clearer understanding of the intent of the Kidder group.
First, take a look at the ACLH website. Prior to yesterday's update the site hadn't been touched since last August. It still had Ares as the investor relations director, and as we all know he's been assigned exclusively to B@CL. Now go to B@CL's site...BIG difference, huh? It's evident where the Internet communications dollars had been invested since the suspension last May.
Second, in the past six months how many "corporate updates" have shareholders received...one, and that would have been yesterday. One update in six months...one. Do my fellow shareholders feel "valued" by ACLH? Whatever your response, consider it a factual manifestation of how you've been made to feel by Kidder's management acumen.
Third, observe that in yesterday's update not once did ACLH admit blame for any of the transactions prior to and subsequent to the suspension. In fact, at every opportunity the company made certain to suggest it too was an unfortunate victim of circumstance [unrelated third parties]. And that is a factual representation of what tens of thousands, if not hundreds of thousands, of dollars spent on legal counsel will buy you.
Now onto speculation: I believe the update accurately confirms that ACLH is still conducting business, but the nature of those activites are more likely directed at moving ACLH's assets to B@CL. I envision this family dynamic taking place in Cali, with sibling rivalries between Kidder and Marchi, with papa Shipley in the middle keeping the peace [pieces]. Marchi's upset, and rightly so, that he has to endure Kidder's tainted mess of a company, and Shipley's doing what he has to out of loyalty to his "firstborn," Kidder. The number one concern for Kidder has not been any of us, it's been himself. What will be his position [$] and authority [$] in B@CL once the patents are transferred. That, more than anything else, has been the business dealings taking place at ACLH. Now what that means to you and me...I don't know. If, and it's a big IF, our shares are transferred to B@CL it would have to be in such a manner as to not negatively impact B@CL's share price. And even so, you're still likely looking at a reverse split, but only sooner than Marchi had planned for B@CL.
So, going back to the three realities cited above, I'm not feeling too comforted by yesterday's update. We'll soon be approaching a year since the suspension, and there isn't a day that I don't think about my $50k losses; because I believed what this company was releasing in it's PRs. The same company that in the past six months only cared enough about me one time, yesterday, to keep me informEd. How reassured could anyone be expected to feel from that?
Releasing our own updates....
Sean confirmed yesterday that Kidder was releasing an update on the ACLH website by the afternoon. As of this morning..nothing. So I decided to do some research...please review the last two 8k filings from B@CL. On Jan 20th the 8k filing states that B@CL formed a wholly owned subsidiary called Nu Tec Energy Corp to "invest in operating and exploratory oil and gas properties". Next in Feb the last 8k states a new relationship with an established Service-Disabled, Veteran Owned Small Business to consult B@CL on acquiring Govt contracts. I find this last development simply unbelievable. How bold, or better yet clueless, is Shipley to engage his efforts in Govt contacting in the shadow of an SEC investigation???
First, let's look at the formation of Nu Tec Energy..is this the company that will acquire ACLH's patent? And if so, what will happen to our shares? Shouldn't we be informed...of anything??? Next, the business dealings with an apparently legitimate Govt contractor. Are Shipley's boys kidding??? All it would take is another phone call from our Grim Reaper protector in Cal, and I can envision a whole new SEC investigation. A newbie at the SEC can make a career for himself going all out on Shipley, Kidder, Marchi, and the crew...
As shareholders I believe we've all been patient; tolerant of the shear dismissal of our monetary investments. I will not stand by silently as these "professionals" move on to their next incarnations and long list of new victims. Let's take another roll call of investors Interested In joining the class action. Please include your contact emails so we can organize ourselves. I've lost my patience with a group of "businessmen" that have no concept of the losses we've all endured. I also believe it's time for a formal investor's letter to the SEC.
Who has volunteered to be the lead plaintiff..? Please make yourself known (personal email) so we can all communicate offline (outside of Investor's Hub). As well, Rocky's got a significant amount of material information to utilize in support of our claim and/or SEC prosecution.
Tex, please take a moment from laughing out loud to elaborate on the statistics you're citing. Please tell us...what are the statistics on the SEC and/or DOJ intervention? What are the statistics on shareholders mustering up the will to proceed with a class action...?
Spoke with Sean today..Sean states the ACLH update in now in their attorney's hands. He made sure to emphasize that it was no longer if and when they'll put an update together, but that an actual update has been written and is now with the attorneys for their review and approval. When asked if this information would be issued as a press release, Sean was uncertain. He was informed that it would be placed on the website, but doesn't know if the update would also be issued as a press release.
Unfornuately, considering the ACLH website has been unattended for five months, I can't imagine Kidder, et.al. believe this limited-release update will have any impact whatsoever. I would hope this update will address not only the future of ACLH and its assets, but more so about the future of our shares...
More Food For Thought...
Spoke with an attorney today who looked up ACT Clean Technologies, Inc and found it's status as "default" under Nevada records. He thinks it may be failure to file annuals, but said it's a lame thing to let slide.. So what's going on..? Getting ready to move assets to BOCL..? Will our shares be along for the ride..? I can't imagine Kidder and Shipley believe we'll all go away quietly if they don't transfer our shares... I don't know what else to do or say...
Time To Pause...
Spoke with Sean, and although I didn't receive anymore reassurance than "we'll be updated soon," I believe we need to holdoff on the class action at this time. First if, IF, Kidder is developing a path forward with our shares intact, they don't need a class action to derail their efforts. Ares always said it would be Jan/Feb timeframe...I suggest we hold off until end of February to pusue the class action. It's a really tough call...but after enduring this nightmare for eight months, what's another month?
I'm one of the bigger losers in all this with $50k gone...but I have to believe, must believe, that I might recoup my losses. I have a better chance of that by giving ACLH another month, than participating in a class action at any time. I've met a few Naval Academy grads
and each time I'm left knowing that I've met special people, that I was really honored to work with. I believe Sean is one of these folks, and I believe he's our advocate to the fullest extent possible.
We need someone to volunteer to be the lead Plaintiff....
Spoke with Sean today who stated he briefed Kidder on our plans for a class action. Sean stated that Kidder has spoken to their attorneys about what response (PR?) they can make. Confirmed ACLH "is an active company still doing business.". Well, if we can trust anyone at that company I would hope it's Sean, since he's a Naval Academy graduate... My take on Kidder's plans...we'll get a PR soon...
We need someone to volunteer to be the lead Plaintiff.
Here's the name of one law firm. DorsalFin also spoke with a different law firm. Rocky, please provide the contact information for the firm you've spoken with...
Goldfarb Branham LLP lawyers have significant experience representing shareholders and whistleblowers in securities lawsuits nationwide. Hamilton Lindley at 877-583-2855 or hlindley@goldfarbbranham.com.
Next Steps For Class Action Against ACLH...
Folks, we'll need someone to volunteer to become the lead Plaintiff. This person will be filing on behalf of all future participating plaintiffs, but will also be entitled to a higher recovery. We've been provided with a couple of attorneys with experience in securities class action cases. I suggest the lead plaintiff make contact with one of these two law firms. Comments..?
Called the "corporate offices" yesterday and spoke with Sean. When asked about any ACLH updates he responded that their attorneys instructed them not to speak about ACLA until the SEC matter was resolved. I then asked if there was an ongoing investigation, to which he replied that it wasn't so much an investigation as it's that they're waiting to answer all the SEC's questions so the SEC will allow them to go back to trading on the pink sheets. I then informed Sean of my understanding that: 1. The SEC rarely ever responds with an "all clear," or with the status of an investigation unless they pursue futher litigation; and 2. The SEC plays no role as to how a suspended company returns to pink trading. For that to occur ACLH would need to identify a market maker that is willing to first sign off on audited financials and then issue bid/ask quotes. Sadly, Sean had nothing to say after that.
My impressions: since the suspension we've been manipulated by not only Shipley and his officers/directors, but also by his legal advisors. How many hundreds of thousands of hard-earned dollars did we well-intentionally invest in ACLA, to then not even deserve the decency of regular updates? Doesn't seen remotely just to me. If Shipley's lawyers are advising silence in preparation of foreseeable legal action, by the SEC and/or investors, then Shipley failed to appreciate the good-will investors may have had if they would have just been communicated with. But instead, nothing but empty promises of "soon" which then led to utter complete silence and disregard. Why shouldn't we investors proceed with litigation. My $50k is gone, why shouldn't we ensure that Shipley, his officers, and directors incur similar financial losses by having to fund their legal defense. I'm certain that's what their lawyers have been working towards. I'm all in with litigation. As we all participate in this roll call, someone should volunteer to take the lead plaintiff role. Do you hear what I'm hearing Shipley? It's a whole suite of cash registers going "cha-ching...cha-ching...cha-ching" over at your lawyer's office..
So what does TD Ameritrade consider the basis of this "investigation complaint?" That unscrupulous directors and officers of a publicly traded company financially benefited by pumping a sub-penny stock [for which they possessed hundreds of millions of shares], and then dumped the stock just before the management-anticipated SEC suspension...? Yea, the outcome of that investigation will get us somewhere....somewhere between "soon" and the January/February's press release.