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.
In researching the Deer lawsuit i found that the case against Geo :
The Court dismissed the complaint against Geoinvesting LLC, primarily on jurisdictional grounds,
That decision has broad implications for the suits against anonymous short-selling bloggers like Carnes, as Edmead acknowledged. "The court recognizes that this result could be viewed as a green light to those who could use this kind of vehicle to manipulate the market," she wrote in the August opinion. "However, the court is constrained to conclude that the challenged statements failed to support a claim for defamation." (Silvercorp counsel Stephen Crimmins of K&L Gates declined to comment.)
The arrests of the Jon Carnes crime family – illegal stock short seller Jon Carnes and his gang members used 14 aliases and 42 various "Yahoo" chat room pseudonyms, duped the NASDAQ, FINRA, the SEC and the New York State Supreme Court: According to investigations by former law enforcement agents, illegal stock short seller "Fatty Boy" Jon Carnes (link) uses a total of 14 aliases and 42 Yahoo chat room names to hide his criminal activities. Jon Carnes's aliases include "Alfred Little", "EOS Holdings", "Andrew Wong", "IFRA", "Quantum Asset Management", "Drew Bernstein", "IFRA Group" and others… In July 2012, Jon Carnes's illegal activities, including fabrication of photos and documents, theft, money laundering, tax evasion, lies to law enforcement officials and corporate espionage, led to the arrests of Jon Carnes's gang members and the incoming prosecutions in early 2013 by two prosecutors' offices against Jon Carnes. Jon Carnes, his Chinese wife Liu Li (a Chinese national) and their fellow criminals may face up to 12 years each in prison. "Fatty Boy" Jon Carnes is currently a fugitive hiding in Vancouver. Jon Carnes made at least $10 million in illicit profits according to this Bloomberg article (link).
Also Deer shut down their factories. Which are not refuted. I have not seen any verification that Longwei does not have a viable business. Why have the auditors now almost 4 months later not stepped down and said , we resign there is no business here? Why hasn't Toups resigned, why does the company bother to even file a suit against Geo et al if they have no viable business? Yes I realize both Deer and Sino Clean filed and were proven to be fraudulent but so did Silvercorp and Olam, they also filed and they are not frauds. It remains to be seen which way this goes.
The letter h in the symbol refers to delinquency and deficiency. If they address these issues they can apply for a re-listing:
The return to listed status for a stock after having been delisted from an exchange for not being in compliance with the exchange's listing requirements. A company's stock may be delisted either by the exchange or voluntarily for a number of reasons including bankruptcy, failure to file mandatory reports, or a depressed share price that is below the exchange's minimum threshold. Once the company puts its house in order and meets the listing requirements, it can apply to relist its shares.
New York, March 22, 2013 – NYSE MKT announced today its final determination to remove the common stock (the “Securities”) of Longwei Petroleum Investment Holding Limited from listing on the Exchange, and filed an application on Form 25 to strike the Securities from listing with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the “SEC”). The delisting will become effective on April 1, 2013 unless postponed by the SEC
Here are their lawyers:
http://www.srff.com/
Securities Lawyers
Sichenzia Ross Friedman Ference LLP is a specialized boutique law firm that provides
Experienced, professional representation for all matters involving the securities industry, as well
as general corporate and litigation matters. Our clients include private and public corporations
(from start-ups to NYSE-listed companies), broker-dealers, investment advisors,
individual corporate investors, partnerships and other entities. We also advise institutional
investors or transactions involving complex securities law considerations. SRFF regularly advises clients regarding corporate and commercial transactions, including public offerings, reverse mergers, private investments in public equity (PIPEs), registered direct offerings, private placements, as well as mergers and acquisitions, and general commercial and securities litigation. We are recognized nationally for innovation, entrepreneurship and legal excellence in public company representations.
Here is the delsiting of Deer shares by Nasdaq:
According to the NASDAQ letter, the NASDAQ Staff’s delisting determination is based on the following allegations: the Company’s false and misleading disclosures regarding the operational status of its manufacturing facilities in Yangjiang, China; the Company’s failure to provide complete responses to NASDAQ Staff’s questions regarding the Company’s customers, suppliers and shipping providers; and the Company’s involvement in a scheme to illicitly transfer corporate funds to a group of stockbrokers through a bogus consulting contract.
Its one thing for a company to be fraudulent but quite another for a company to be deficient yet attacked to the same degree using front-running tactics and making general accusations that distort the facts. In reading an article on Silvercorp metal that Cairns attacked using the same tactics, the Forbes writer concluded that 70% of what Cairnes said was "fluff". His conclusion was that the grades of the ore were inflated. Is that fraud as Cairnes alleged? The intent was to destroy the company and its shareholders with it. It did not work but has marred the reputation obviously. How is inflating ore grades any different that a a tech company giving guidance on sales that turn out to be highly inflated and then providing excuses as to why they were? Somewhat like what Oracle recently did and then blames their sales staff for dropping the ball. Can you imagine a hit piece on a tech company using the same metrics it would never happen yet the analogy is there.
Ultimately if Longwei is proven to be a fraudulent organization I will be the first to congratulate Geo/Cairnes. If however they are proven to be deficient in their public information but otherwise run a legitimate business like Silvercorp is this acceptable? Are the rights of freedom of speech more valuable that the individual investor who will/has lost substantial amounts of money here? These are questions each person should ask themselves. I am not taking sides here. If Longwei proves a viable business then GEO/Cairnes should be punished to the full extent of the law, but will they? If they are proven to be a fraudulent company the individuals to the extent they can be should be prosecuted fully.
This is the company's response on regaining compliance:
Pursuant to Section 802(b) of the Company Guide, the Company has until the earlier of its next annual shareholders' meeting or one year from the event that caused the failure to comply to regain compliance with NYSE MKT's board independence requirements (provided, however, that if the annual shareholders' meeting occurs no later than 180 days following the event that caused the failure to comply, the Company shall have 180 days from the date of such event to regain compliance).
Pursuant to Section 803(B)(6)(b), the Company will have until the earlier of its next annual shareholders' meeting or one year from the occurrence of the event that caused the failure to comply to regain compliance with NYSE MKT's audit committee composition requirement, provided, however, that if the Company's annual shareholders; meeting occurs no later than 75 days following the event that caused the failure to comply, the Company shall instead have 75 days from the date of such event to regain compliance
I understand what you are saying however, every person making statement in their defamation requires an affidavit to be signed, the parties are deposed and are legally bound by what they claim. No lawyer would file a suit without evidence of each point being crystal clear. There is no middle truth as you say, it's either true or it is isn't. I am basing my opinion on the integrity of the lawyers not the company. Also every case is different and can't really be compared other than on the surface. Who knows where the price goes but these are strong allegations and just because other lawsuits have not been proven does not mean this one won't. These are serious charges the company is alleging against Cairnes and Geo, they better be right in what they said.
Interesting, did you read the entire defamation lawsuit? How do you know what their future plans are regarding the tender offers. Have they not asserted that the allegations are false by launching the suit under the penalty of perjury?
Just looking at the allegations about the trucks fueling. Geo says one truck viewed on their videos, which are dark, grainy and compressed as opposed to a real-time view from several cameras with date/time visible showing 22 trucks fuelling in 2 days. Huge discrepancy here. You don't think it is possible that there is a strong profit motive here on behalf of Geo/Cairnes to fudge the data? I read a review of one of Cainres other attacks on Silvercorp metals on Barrons and the author concluded that 70% of the information was b/s. Who is to says what percentage of this Geo article is also b/s, could 90%
Longwei says that they derive "substantial revenues through drop shipments of fuel directly to is customers from suppliers not correlated to the activity at its facilities. Did the Geo article even discuss this , if so I did not see it.
I don't understand what you mean by 2?
Read the conclusion and what Longweit is asking of the courts. If successful they have many options available. Not saying they will be however . This is the first real answer to the Geo article and every point is answered.
True, what got them on the greys was their inability to file their audited financial data and not getting two independent board members. That is a chicken and egg problem. They could not attract two people until their investigation was completed which it sounds like it is but not in time to avoid this.
Sounds like they have that now so it will be interesting to see if they file audited data?
No idea whether they will win or not because the US allows people to hide behind first amendment rights while they lie and cheat "honest" investors out of their money. Read the defamation lawsuit, every single item that the Geo article attacked Longwei on is addressed.
You can find it on the Longwei website. In reading it all the allegations are countered. What I found interesting is that the suit links Jon Cairnes(Alfredlittle.com) with Geo. Cairnes is hiding in Vancouver and claims to be a whistleblower which he is not. Longwei has six charges against the group including racketeering charges or (RICO) statutes. I am sure that Longwei is/has done an external audit which they will present in court. Regarding the truck counts and how they generate revenues, it is stated that most of the fuel is directly sent to the users and does not come from the fueling stations. Also the deal with Cai and the supposed inappropriate investment, as I suspected under Chinese law this is an arms length investment that has nothing to do with Longwei therefore is not reportable to the SEC. It's all there, everything that the company claims will be deposed and is punishable under the perjury laws so this is a legal and binding document that will land Toups and Cai in jail if proven false.
Have a read let me know your thoughts
thanks
If anyone has shares in this you should read the defamation lawsuit against GEO ,Seeking Alpha and Jon Carnes...the lawsuit is for a minimum of $242 million dollars plus legal fees, they are also alleged to be involved in RICO claims, wire and mail fraud. These are some serious allegations.
Unlike you there are/were many holders of VRNG who have been in this for quite a while. Many have become disillusioned with the time this process has taken, November 6 jury verdict and then 4 months of post-trial motions. Some have sold as a result. Also because the company is not at the stage where they can look in another direction there is a news vacuum. All that plus human psychology and a 15 million share short position , shake it up and this is what you get. Rulings by the judge whenever that is will change the dynamics. That's my take.
Buying back shares is not a good use of their cash in my opinion. The reason is that there are many law suits to come and lawsuits are expensive. I would love to agree with you that they should buy back shares but it would not be the best option. The reason for their canned cc could be that they do not want to slip on any confidential discussions going on is my guess. You will usually find the free and easy , shoot the breeze conference calls are from companies not doing anything worthwhile. These serious professional type calls are usually doing something major behind the scenes. I have listened to thousand of calls over the years and this is my observation. I can tell you are frustrated as am I but I feel much better listening to management than just watching the daily drift. I know some people will sell because they are disappointed that is their choice. Every sale has a buyer attached to it.
Couple of points. First where do you get that shorts win 80% of the time. If this was true then everyone should short right! The real numbers are more like 50/50. Lots of shorts have been crushed in the rally since the new year. Many people seem to think that shorts have some special information or knowledge that isn't public. None of that is true, look at Netflix and BBRY to name a few, huge short positions and they continue to go up. Anyway is doesn't matter whether the company says the decisions are due or not, they will come when they come. One thing I do know is that it is highly unlikely that there are no decision a month from now. I think much sooner however is more likely.
Here is a story from Forbes about how hard it is to make money shorting stocks.
For hedge fund managers, shorting stocks has become increasingly tougher and hedge fund traders have become much more reluctant to bet against individual companies. This important new trend can be seen in the decrease of short interest activity in individual stocks—over 18 million shares on the New York Stock Exchange in July 2008 versus 13.3 million in October 2012—and it may help explain the poor overall performance that has hit the hedge fund industry on the whole in recent years.
Some people still think it will be months before we get a ruling. Most have been saying any day now for a while, the company simply confirms that any day now is correct. Those wanting to short this now are foolish and are playing with fire.
Here is the language from the 10Q filing. I read this as all the motions are ripe for judicial determination (rulings) save one.
After trial, I/P Engine and Defendants filed post-trial motions with the court. The parties have now fully briefed all but one of the filed post-trial motions. I/P Engine filed motions related to the issues of laches, damages, and post-judgment royalties, which is the one motion not fully briefed. The Defendants filed motions related to issues of non-infringement, invalidity and damages. The court has denied I/P Engine’s motion related to the issue of laches.
The fully briefed motions are ripe for judicial determination. The court has indicated that after the currently-briefed motions are decided, the court may consider the issue of post-judgment royalties.
Great recap.
I just want to clarify one point and add some information from the 10 Q. The comment about the motions being fully briefed is as of today not Feb 15 I believe.
From 10Q filed
The fully briefed motions are ripe for judicial determination. The court has indicated that after the currently-briefed motions are decided, the court may consider the issue of post-judgment royalties
Our Strategy
We innovate, acquire, license and protect intellectual property worldwide. We continually strive to expand our portfolio of intellectual property both through acquisition and development. Our goal is to partner with inventors who own the rights on compelling technologies. As of today, we manage an intellectual property portfolio consisting of over 500 patents and patent applications, covering telecom infrastructure, internet search, and mobile technologies.
These patents and patent applications have been developed internally and acquired from third parties. To date we have filed 24 patents and had three issued in the United States and one notice of allowance in Europe. We believe that licenses to certain of our patents will be of interest to other application developers, infrastructure providers and manufacturers, and hardware manufacturers.
Our business strives to innovate, acquire, license and protect intellectual property worldwide. Our attempts are focused on identification, acquisition and generation of economic benefits of owned intellectual property assets. We plan to continue to further expand our existing portfolio through acquisition, as well as through internal development of new innovative technologies. We intend to monetize our intellectual property assets through a variety of value enhancing
initiatives, including, but not limited to:
• licensing,
• strategic partnerships, and • litigation.
I agree with your assessment. This is why they did not let Cliff speak, they were worried he might give something away. This company has a plan and they are executing, it is not as fast as we would like, but courts can't be rushed. I listened to what the company has in mind and they and they will deliver on multiple fronts, licensing agreements, the new lawyer hired has experience in monetizing patents and they said "he has been very helpful" in this area. They seemed quite confident in the "jury error" question also and stated a one-day mini trial will address it. I can't see how this can possibly not be fixed in Vringo's favor. The evidence is quite clear. We have a great team here and patience will be rewarded.
Think we close over three tomorrow
Did you really expect to hear material news from a company run by lawyers? I understand what you are saying though.
the revenue miss would be bearish and could explain the drop at the end of the trading day. Granted, the potential value in this stock is not current revenue but potential revenue from the Google litigation.
ok but my eyes don't lie....something good this way comes........
Stock trading very well heading into the close...
Doubt there is much short-covering here, volume is anaemic, needs to see 5-10 million shares for that...
Yes you are correct, there is a bigger story here than flipping the patents. There is potentially larger outcome.
Risk management is subjective. It is what makes a market
Why is it going to be within a month? Why take on the risk? VRNG is a better buy post rulings than pre-rulings.
Everyone can make up their own minds on that point. If you believe JMOL will not be denied short away its that simple. Money is made at inflection points.
If we had to wait another five months you would be right. However the rulings will be a binary event. The catalyst will be judges denial of Google's JMOL. This should be within a month most likely...quiet accumulation if you are bullish is the best course if you are bearish short the rallies.
Pushed down on light volume, shorts protecting their turf. Only real news from the courts will move the needle.
Google's reckoning is coming as is the general markets. The apathy at what Vringo offers is only exceeded by the apathy of the general markets denial of the crumbling euro zone. Both offer compelling opportunities
I have been saying this for a while. Google's arrogance will cost them. They had a chance to do a deal pre-trial at favorable terms. Now they continue to infringe willfully. I expect the judge to increase rr rate to at least 5%.
Thomson Reuters ONE via COMTEX) -- Vringo to Develop Wireless Technology for First Responders
NEW YORK - March 19, 2013 - Vringo, Inc. (nyse mkt:VRNG), a company engaged in the innovation, development and monetization of mobile technologies and intellectual property, today announced a partnership with Virginia Tech Intellectual Properties (VTIP), the licensing arm of Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University, commonly known as Virginia Tech.
Through the partnership, VTIP has provided exclusive rights to patented wireless technology that will enable Vringo to conduct related research and development and secure future licensing rights. This technology was developed at Virginia Tech's Wireless@VT research group, one of the largest university wireless research groups in the United States. The technology was funded in part under a grant from the National Science Foundation. The National Science Foundation is an independent federal agency created by Congress to promote the progress of science, advance the national health, prosperity, and welfare, and secure the national defense.
Vringo will lead the research and development efforts for the technology.
"Virginia Tech is a top academic and research institution. Vringo's partnership with VTIP furthers our mission to support research and innovation of cutting edge wireless technologies," said Ken Lang, Chief Technology Officer of Vringo. "These new patents are complementary to Vringo's extensive world-wide patent portfolio covering wireless telecommunications infrastructure," Mr. Lang added.
"VTIP is pleased to partner with Vringo to further develop this technology as a cornerstone for future cell phone systems," noted Mark Coburn, President of VTIP. "Vringo has just the characteristics we are looking for to help us take emerging technologies to market."
Upon further development, the patented technology could potentially enable first responders to quickly set up a wireless network in areas where telecommunication infrastructure has been destroyed or rendered inoperable. Through this technology, rescue workers and people in need of help could remain in communication with each other and the outside world. The technology may also have consumer applications, allowing for wireless communication in areas where wireless service is limited or unavailable, such as subways, tunnels, or remote locations.
The licensed patents are U.S. Patent 7,289,972, entitled "Cognitive Radio Engine Based On Genetic Algorithms In A Network" and U.S. Patent 8,094,610, entitled "Dynamic Cellular Cognitive System." In August 2012, Vringo expanded its patent portfolio with the acquisition of over five hundred patents and patent applications covering telecommunications infrastructure.
About Virginia Tech Intellectual Properties
Formed in 1985 as an affiliated corporation of Virginia Tech, Virginia Tech Intellectual Properties is passionate in its pursuit of excellence in technology commercialization, creating market opportunities from scientific innovation. It strives to make a positive contribution to society through its expertise in protecting, marketing and commercializing technology and innovation. Its goal is to pursue innovative strategies to help translate scientific progress into tangible products, while returning income to the inventor and Virginia Tech to support further research and education. VTIP facilitates the licensing of technology to companies, encourages new faculty startup ventures, works with publishers and distributors of software, and supports the transfer of research and knowledge to other universities, research institutes and companies.
About Vringo, Inc.
Vringo, Inc. is engaged in the innovation, development and monetization of mobile technologies and intellectual property. Vringo's intellectual property portfolio consists of over five hundred patents and patent applications covering telecommunications infrastructure, internet search, and mobile technologies. The patents and patent applications have been developed internally, and acquired from third parties. Vringo operates a global platform for the distribution of mobile social applications and services. For more information, visit: www.vringoIP.com.
Forward-Looking Statements
This press release includes forward-looking statements, which may be identified by words such as believes," "expects," "anticipates," "estimates," "projects," "intends," "should," "seeks," "future," "continue," or the negative of such terms, or other comparable terminology. Forward-looking statements are statements that are not historical facts. Such forward-looking statements are subject to risks and uncertainties, which could cause actual results to differ materially from the forward-looking statements contained herein. Factors that could cause actual results to differ materially include, but are not limited to: the inability to realize the potential value created by the merger with Innovate/Protect for our stockholders; our inability to raise additional capital to fund our combined operations and business plan; our inability to monetize and recoup our investment with respect to patent assets that we acquire; our inability to maintain the listing of our securities on the NYSE MKT; the potential lack of market acceptance of our products; our inability to protect our intellectual property rights; potential competition from other providers and products; our inability to license and monetize the patents owned by our subsidiaries; our inability to monetize and recoup our investment with respect to patent assets that we acquire; and other risks and uncertainties and other factors discussed from time to time in our filings with the Securities and Exchange Commission ("SEC"), including our quarterly report on Form 10-Q filed with the SEC on November 14, 2012. Vringo expressly disclaims any obligation to publicly update any forward-looking statements contained herein, whether as a result of new information, future events or otherwise, except as required by law.
Contacts:
Investors and Media:
Cliff Weinstein
Executive Vice President
Apple could easily do this without blinking $130 billion cash hoarde plus they don' like Google....possible
Stock trading up in premarket..now @ $3 2.97 - 3.06
Who would tender a $30 offer?
Interesting comment care to elaborate, who do you speculate?
We don't have to get an announcement however we can expect once literally at any moment , only the judge knows when. The time is near though.
Not sure about, that I was watching 2 events last week. First VHC was just getting hammered on no news just chatter on message boards a few hours later Bloomberg put out some news but by then it was down 30%. The other was BBRY I watched it start "twitching" every trade was going off on the ask I bought it on no news later the news was a million new phones were ordered, sold it after hours. MY point is news is instantaneous, it becomes official with a lag, but there is always knowledge of good and bad news.
I agree, I understand the short game has worked so far mainly due the persistent delays in arriving at a conclusion. However now we are at a point in time where we can reasonably expect to receive word at any moment. To continue to to be short now seems to me very foolish and risky.
the aggregate was 152,200 SHARES AT THE BID $2.98
bid/ask 2.98- 3.03