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.
I have my doubts about "Phoenix Renewable Energy".
I can’t find them quoted anywhere or what symbol they are using.
They have web site at:
http://phoenixrenewableenergy.com/home.html
It looks like some fly-by-night company’s web sites I have checked on in the past which eventually just vanished.
They must be real if GBRC are dealing with them, Mustn't They ?
What am I missing ?
From the GBRC filing
Universal Alternative Fuels, Inc.,
a Nevada corporation
having a principal place of business at
1400 Old Country Road, Suite 206, Westbury, NY 11590.
Greg Goldberg, President
From
UNITED STATES
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
Washington D.C. 20549
FORM 10-Q
ATWOOD MINERALS AND MINING CORP.
1400 Old Country Road, Suite 206, Westbury, New York 11590
(Address of principal executive offices, including zip code.)
(State or other jurisdiction of incorporation or organization Nevada
(telephone number, including area code) (516) 228-0070
s/ Greg Goldberg
President, Principal Executive Officer,
Principal Financial Officer, Principal
Accounting Officer, Secretary,
Treasurer and sole Director
IMO
Universal Alternative Fuels, Inc. and ATWOOD MINERALS AND MINING CORP. One and the same
Doesn't look good
IMO
As far as I can see they still have nothing to sell, just a working concept.
The Lab machine is looking better but it still doesn’t look like a working machine.
They seem to be feeding in pre-shredded bits of tire a handful at a time from an old bucket for Christ’s sake, come on is that supposed to impress buyers?
They should have a fully working model by now, on site at a nearby tire dump, and converting enough tires to pay ongoing expenses (even making a profit). And (more importantly) building up a database of results for the buyer to see.
Even if they haven’t built the first full size one yet I would still expect to see a fully working miniature (say a one-tire-at-a-time model). Then any problems, such as the bits at the edge, can be brushed off with a quick preview of the final, full size, modified design.
If I was buying I would at least want to see a proposed final design on paper, a scale model (like they have for boats, cars, buildings etc) and finally a graphic / computer presentation of the proposed finished model in action.
They need to present solutions to common questions (which I’m sure they must have been asked ) like, how long to deliver and set up/install, what’s needed at the site before delivery, health and safety, fire precautions, local and national regulations, staff training (must they be high paid engineers or what), etc.
IMO
This company is not interested in selling any machines they are interested in selling the company to one of the major players. As a share holder whether its just for profit, like most of us, or also for greener motives I think we are all going to get the dirty end of the stick.
I’ve had another one of these recently, again from a US law firm (they had a pretty much basic off-the-peg website).
I pretty much ignored it.
However I was wondering (for future reference and general interest and, if possible, to cause trouble for them), if there is anyway to check if this law firm really exists and if the names given are actually lawyers / solicitors.
Is there some type of register that you can check ?
You always see in the movies about lawyers being struck off (or is that doctors?).
If these really are certified lawyers, (after all, you can buy almost anything these days), is there a watchdog committee that their, probably fraudulent in some way, offers can be reported to.
America’s usually dead keen when it comes to setting up committees like that even if the committees can’t do anything about it.
I would have thought at the least they could run a database so that, if these peoples name/alias’s ever came to the police’s attention, and they did a search, a big bell would ring. Just My Opinion.
I don’t suppose there is anything like that in the UK.
Where would one even start to look for such information, or for somebody to ask questions of?
It’s not something you can keep running to the police to ask about – is it?
(Not forgetting such information must be got for free).
I am often confused by the frequent high stock price quoted here for this stock last year. I check this stock most days and just can’t recall it going much over $3.
I checked with Quote.com and they have the 52 week high as 3.24 which sounds about right.
http://www.quote.com/us/stocks/quote.action?s=GBRC
Prophet.net has the same quote. –
http://www.prophet.net/quotes/quotePopup.jsp?colorscheme=home&symbol=GBRC
Whilst the charts showed it hitting 5.1 in July/August 2007 most of the rest of the year was under 3, and the months previous where under 1.5.
IMO
It seems wrong to keep quoting here $5 as ‘last years’ price when it clearly wasn’t, you may as well quote the more than $10 that mobile-stream was worth before the stock split dropped it to nothing and it was then transferred to Global ownership (still highly suspicious and a black mark in my book).
Or was this a $5 spike that the charts don’t acknowledge ? If so why not ?
Did anybody manage to trade it. (Had I seen it I would have been very tempted to try and get in short in sheer disbelief).
As an MSRM stock holder the price would have to go past 3.6 for me to break even and as for the $4.75 warrants they will never be worth the paper they are written on and are as suspicious as that stock split. IMO
Oh yeah, by the way is LOL (as used by many here) – Lots Of Luck or Laugh Out Load ?
I can’t always tell when you are joking, wishing well or just being tongue in cheek. LoL
I also have a letter.
Mine is from the U.S. Department of justice in Florida.
Not sure what to do about it.
Loath to throw stones in the water and sink any chance of GBRC swimming out of this present economic crises and making me some money (eventually).
Still betting on shares is really all about me, so I suppose I will fill it out and send it off.
Wish they had mentioned criminal cases against the company’s I bought that have done a runner instead of the only one still around and (seemingly) trying.
I have also been in contact with the transfer agents in the past and occasionally receive an update/ correspondence from them so assume my shares are as genuine as everybody else’s.
Ref my post 2748 and Hawks reply post 2749 concerning what has to be done to the oil after its recovered from tires.
Does Europe have the infrastructure to refine the oil on site like the USA?
I thought all our oil was offshore hence no resources for dealing with oil and gas on land.
It doesn’t sound a big deal to buy the portable refinery vehicle and such, but with Europe’s dense population it will have to be totally non-intrusive to the population and very-very safe or there will be hell to pay.
In Europe it might be better to move the tires to the processor. More expense, especially knowing the Europeans fondness for gauging as much out of government funded projects as they can and to hell with the consequences. IMO
I think that’s the same everywhere.
If it has to wait for new laws / Rules to be made (might even be in the works) then we all know how long that can take.
Yeah, that’s probably where I remember it from, thank’s PACOR.
Thanks Hawk,
That’s good solid info and clears a lot of my concerns / negativity towards GBRC's tire venture.
A matter of interest (to me)
As I understand it the company GBRC’s main business at this present time is going to be the making and selling of a machine to break down tires and recover Oil, Gas and steel using microwave technology.
Whilst they have indicated there are lots of other uses, oil shale, landfills, medicine and such, their only source of income (right now, after years of development) comes from proving their machine works and selling it.
My curiosity forces me to ask the following:
1. Does the machine go to the tires or do the tires come to the machine.
I thought the former but it presents lots of problems with moving the raw oil and gas around the country. Whilst the latter would be expense, unless the government step in and make correct tire disposal law and pass that cost of transporting the tires to a designated disposal point on to the consumer, can’t see that happening.
2. How does the oil and gas get to the refinery (presuming it has to be refined before being sold)?
In the oil fields I have seen they just pipe it direct to a pumping station and then away to the refinery, which they can still do if the tires come to a fixed location nearby. If the machine goes to the tires are we looking at transporting the Oil and gas? (making the active participation of the oil company’s vital).
3. Does anybody actually want to buy this machine?
It seems to me that who ever buys a machine is at the mercy of the oil company’s who can just kill the whole project at any time saying its not needed yet. Maybe in 50 years time?
I am concerned that GBRC, once they have proven the technology works, are going to once again change their name, takeover themselves (GBRC takeover MSRM) again, transfer the now proven technology to the new company and leave GBRC and its machine to sink. Along with its troublesome (and vocal) share holders.
Pessimistic, true but what have GBRC done to inspire our trust. Best thing to do (IMO) with this company is keep scalping and be ready to duck for cover.
Thanks Kenny, good info.
I was under the impression that the GBRC shares, that are to be issued to replace our MSRM shares, are going to be free of all restrictions and so we didn't have to do anything but wait.
Do you think that is wrong and we will still have to lift the MSRM share restrictions before exchanging them for GBRC shares?
I agree, definitely a con, we have had a lot of those, I have had 3 offers, the last for $5 a share and the highest for $9.50 (although none since the SEC got involved).
They usually want you to register and sell the shares through them before they pay you. You pay the registration, commision fee etc at the price per share they have offered you.
So the higher their offer the more you pay them.
All covered by the price you will get when they pay you for your shares, of course.
So far nobody on this board have said they got paid for their shares after paying their fee’s, so the rest of us have saved our money and stayed out.
Still it got the old ticker going………
I seem to recall seeing a distributed list of share holders (which I can no longer find) listing all the share holders in MSRM or GBRC (can't remember which).
It listed franks wife with nearly as many shares as him. What happened to them?
Changing the name is not very important
In my opinion
Yes it is!!
If GBRC does not become identified with this technology investors will invest in anybody with a similar product.
Not good.
GBRC is doing all the PR so what its called must immediately bring to mind GBRC.
Otherwise everybody else gets a free ride (if there is one).
I’m a little confused with all this talk of using Klystron and Magnetron technology for oil recovery / extraction, although I do understand the theory. Also my knowledge of working oil wells is small.
Having said that, isn’t the whole idea of an oil well to bring the oil to the surface for refining and use?
GBRC is selling the idea of recovering / extracting oil using their technology, better than any other existing method.
They say they can do this with shale.
Which is down the well.
How are they going to get TO the shale with their technology to extract the oil?
Surely they can’t just pump the shale up, or send their equipment down?
I thought shale was a bit like gravel, only little bits of shell.
Existing oil rigs, as far as know, pump / suck the oil to the surface. Sometimes they have to drop chemicals into the well to force the shale to give up more of its oil, which is then pumped to the surface. Once the oil stops or becomes to uneconomical to get they cap the well and walk away.
But the shale always stays down the well.
So what use is this technology to the oil companys?
Why should they buy GBRC's product, (or any other companys shale extraction equipment)?
I hope they do, but I just don't see why !
Dragon man,
When you reply to a deleted post can you make it private and just send it to that person?
Trying to follow the board and reading half of the conversation, mostly just seeing your reply’s to tire-chiefs deleted posts, is making the board unwieldy.
Now the MSRM board is unused this is the only source of information relevant to MSRM shareholders.
In My Opinion .
Tire chiefs value to this board is as a possible competitor in the same field showing GBRC is not alone and might have something worth while (or not).
Your task (for which I thank you, its not something I would care to do) is to weed out his continuous self advertising whilst trying to keep any relevant technical information he submits about this new field that might shed some light on what’s going on at GBRC.
If you need help with the technical stuff perhaps somebody could help out as your assistant Mediator(possibly hardball as he seems quite technically minded)
But all the endless personal stuff about who’s right and who’s wrong, who was first and who is best, but mostly reply’s to posts the rest of us never see (and likely don’t want to) need to be deleted from the board and in future just sent to the individual only.
In fairness to regularly deleted posters perhaps you could write a weekly update summarising what kind of posts you have felt it best to reject and who from.
I did hire a profesional for advice, my research showed they had been in bussiness for 8 years, had an office in Switzerland and a new one just opening in Australia.
Unfortunatly they where called Auston Rowe.
Boards like this have been a great help, I have learnt a lot.
But I still dont know how to do Due Dilligence.
Anybody know any good tutorials, books etc about DD, preferably in plain, simple languge or blow by blow instructions?
My only access to the world of finanace, stocks and shares, is through the internet and press and they are not that relyable.
I learn the hard way.
Still, Im into Mobilestream and possibly soon GBRC, the same as those who know DD.
Hopefully, despite the stress and tension, my luck will hold and I might not do too badly.
Time will tell.
From the top of this board.
Frank Pringle, the controlling stockholder of Mobilestream, has agreed to convert the balance of his shares of Mobilestream Common Stock to shares of Mobilestream's Preferred Stock.
and the holders of the Preferred Stock will receive 70,472,376 shares of the Company's Preferred stock.
------------------
Doesnt this mean he didnt give them up ?
Wont he receive GBRC shares for his Preferred stock ?
I am as foxed as you. This S1 might tell some people a lot but I can only trust in the US Goverment experts when / if they accept the S1, that everything is on the up and up.
At least pringle has shown willing to be officialy scrutinised which offers hope.
I have been following the GBRC board, but until my MSRM shares are converted and I have the choice to sell or hold the shares I have no real interest in buying GBRC shares.
My original shares offer, from the wonderful Auston Rowe, was for a company that had this great technology that got oil from tires. I rejected this as being a waste of time and unsustainable. Oil from tires just seemed a daft idea to me and still does.
They came back a few weeks later with another wonderful company, with even better technology that could get nearly 100% of the oil from the shale still in old oil wells or from dredging harbours and environmental spills.
Seemed something the US government would get behind and profitable. The MSRM web site talked of only that at that time.
I was shocked to hear mobile stream oil announce there new tire processing process / factory.
It was almost the only thing now on their web site.
GBRC is (as far as I am concerned) the same company and people.
As fogonthetyne says - Give me my GBRC shares (unrestricted and ready to go). Acknowledge I exist as a valid shareholder and I will listen.
Until then the GBRC board is just so much Hot air.
I will continue to follow the GBRC board, but I have no intention of investing my money with GBRC. For me, at this time, they are still just Mobilstream under a different name.
Not a company I could trust.
Media49 – post 1119
I got the same Tax loss story off both. Just didn’t believe it
Shotokan – post 1121
Thanks a lot, sorry you got caught.
Foggonthetyne – post 1134
It is obvious, more so if you read this board and get plain, honest responses from the members.
I have received similar offers from:
Gemini = $5 a share and $16,000 fee
Ashley partners for $9.25 a share, who never confirmed the fee
believe it will be similar to Gemini, 10% of their purchase price.
The more they offer the higher the fee.
This fee, I was told, is for 2 things:
For removing the share restrictions:
I have found quotes on the internet at £150 from a UK company and $150 from various USA, Canadian companies for removing restriction under with Rule 144K (for stock owned for 2 years). Double that for stock only 1 year old (rule 144).
Or just try and process it yourself through Mobilestream's stock transfer agents who I think is Manhattan transfer (Can download the form from many places)..
Also for Validation, to make sure you are not a suspected or known criminal or terrorist.
This just sounds wrong.
Also said (Gemini in writing) the fee would all be repaid in my final settlement price.
I’m waiting for somebody else to go first……
Yes, Im a UK investor. One of Auston Rowes suckers!
Anybody heard of David Cohen Investments in Florida?
Part of National Securities (their web site is more for their group rather than individual services).
www.nationalsecurities.com
Offers an on-line account, secure holding of stock, the status of which can be viewed through the account and also see me through the Rule 144K registering process.
Then try and sell it, if I want, (wasn’t selling a dream, just practical, get what you can for it, if you can, ie: peanuts, but at the moment something).
Don’t know what the fees are yet,. I think a lot depends on if they can be sold and for how much and if I want to sell now or wait.
I'm just checking it all out now as I don’t have anybody yet.
He was very knowledgeable about the whole history of Mobilestream, Oil, really knew what he was talking about.
Claimed to have a lot of experience with restricted shares, including Mobilestream oil and with the various transfer agents, including Manhattan Transfer.
At the moment I don’t believe this SEC filling will ever amount to anything.
I think its just smoke and light.
I've got over 30K shares after the split, I agree with the red flag and have no idea what they expect to make out of it.
I can't see how they can takeover without buying the pringles majority.
Having said that if they think they can make something, then good luck to them, as long as its not made at my expense.
I would have thought a hostile takeover of this size would be done through a large, well established, company.
Still, if they put it in writing I'll definatly seek advice.
Must be some way of selling (possibly through a third party broker?) and protecting myself.
The offer really was "to good to be true" so I'm not holding my breath.
UPDATE:
Just got a call from Ashley Partners, NOT Aston Rowe, nothing to do with them, they got my contact details from the US registar.
They are going to contact all share holders on behalf of their clients, (have to by Law, according to them).
Their offer was very, very good. (to good to be true?).
Going to bite their hand off (if its pukka).
Will be sending me the offer in writing.
Have they contacted anybodyelse yet?
I got the letter this week, Its just a list of proposels of amendments to the Articals of incorporation by the board that have been passed in october 2007.
It does say that Frank Pringle is the main stock holder (69.57%) so persumably all the proposels are his and all the votes needed to pass them are his.
He is the board.
Later it shows him converting his perfered stock to common stock and says he now has 36.69% of voting control.
The next page shows him still in control with 69.57%.
It also showes Lois Pringle with 72.03% ?
Its 21 pages long and I just stopped reading.
It was written for october 2007 which, for me, makes it interesting but of little relevance as I obviously don't understand what It was all about.
In my view if he now has 39% and Lois has 72% (British maths must be different to American) then nothings changed.
I don't think its Aston Rowe, but the contact details they used for me must have come from their database, so maybe its another incarnation of them, or one of their staff turning a fast buck...
It was an email.
They supplied a telephone number, I just edited it out
James Robson
Senior Vice President of Accounts
Ashley Partners Mergers & Acquisitions
Phone: +1 (860) 760-1720
Fax: + 1 (860) 760-6834
james.robson@ashleypartners.com
us@ashleypartners.com
Found their web site as below
http://www.ashleypartners.com/?page=home
Just Lawyers....
Just received this email, Suspect they are something to do with Auston Rowe as they tried to get in touch using the contact details they had for me.
Sounds very Sus to me, all my shares are restricted, not made contact yet.
Anybody else get anything?
I represent Ashley Partners Mergers and Acquisitions and attempted to contact you with regards to a proposed acquisition of an equity you own, Mobilestream Oil, Inc..
Our clients are making a hostile takeover bid and as such are offering what we feel is a very good price to conclude this acquisition as quickly as possible. If you wish to discuss this further you are welcome to contact me directly or alternatively supply me with a telephone number I can reach you on. I hope to hear from you soon.
Regards,
James Robson
Senior Vice President of Accounts
Ashley Partners Mergers & Acquisitions
100 Pearl Street, 11th Floor
Hartford, CT 06103
us@ashleypartners.com
Restrictions:
I’ve been looking into getting the restrictions removed from some other stock I own.
As my Mobilestream shares will soon qualify for 2 years ownership I did a quick search for Rule 144 opinions and came up with these 3 company’s in the USA and one in the UK who appear to offer an all in one package (I’m sure there are lots more).
www.144opinions.com/
www.rule144solution.com/index.asp
www.rule144letters.com
http://reg-s.co.uk/introtemplate2.swf
These are Lawyers so they cost good money, (the UK one is about double the USA ones), has anybody else looked into using them or tried their services, or have other recomendations?
Their frequently asked questions are interesting, such as these…
Q.
When can I get the restrictive legend removed from my stock certificate?
A.
If you are not using Rule 144 for a sale into the public securities market, you must wait until you are eligible to use Rule 144K (a 24 month holding period) to get the restrictive legend removed from a certificate you want to continue holding or to transfer into your brokerage account, if you have no intent to immediately sell it.
Q.
How long must I own the stock before I can sell under Rule 144??
A.
You must own the stock (have a "holding period") of more than 12 months, before using Rule 144 to sell stock into the public securities market. If you do not actually intend to sell the securities into the public securities market, you cannot use Rule 144
Q.
How long is the Form 144 good for?
A.
Each Form 144 is good for three months from the filing date.
Q.
What happens if I do not sell all the shares indicated on my Form 144 within the three months?
A.
You must either file a new Form 144 (in which case you can add shares back up to the one percent level) or your broker will return the unsold shares to the transfer agent for the reiussue of a certificate with a restrictive legend (unless Rule 144K has become available since you filed your Form 144).
Q.
Is there a limit to the number of shares I can sell under Rule 144?
A.
Yes. In a three month period, you can sell only a maximum of one percent of the number issued and outstanding shares the issuing company has stated in its most recently published report - usually, on the Pink Sheets or in an SEC filing - unless the stock is traded on NASDAQ or an exchange. In the latter case, the limit in a three month period is the average weekly trading volume for the full four week period preceding the date you file your Form 144 with the SEC, if it is higher than the one percent limitation. The limit applies only to the stock you sell in reliance upon Rule 144, and does not include free trading stock you own or stock you sell under a registration statement, all of which could be sold simultaniously.
Q.
What is the 2 Year Component of Rule 144?
A.
Rule 144 eases the restrictions on sales of stock that have been held for two years--this subsection is 144(k), but only for non control persons. After the two-year holding period, Rule 144(k) eliminates the current public information requirement, eliminates all volume restrictions, eliminates the "manner of sale" restrictions that apply to the way brokers must handle 144 sales, and eliminates the required filing of Form 144. Thus, Rule 144(k) removes all significant restrictions to resale for non-affiliates who hold shares for 2 years.
Q.
Do I need to use a broker for a Rule 144K transaction?
A.
You do not need a broker if you want to continue holding the clean certificate in your own name. You will need a broker, if you want to put the stock in your brokerage account ("street name"), but you can get a clean certificate yourself and deliver it to your broker.
Q.
Can an Issuer Refuse to Allow me to Transfer my Shares?
A.
Sometimes an issuer can refuse, but generally, no. An issuer can refuse to allow you to transfer or sell shares if that transfer or sale is in violation of Rule 144 or other law. But, if the transfer or sale is legal, then the issuer cannot refuse to allow you to transfer your shares. Sometimes, however, issuers will impose trivial or burdensome requirements on shareholders, but such actions are not legal and not ethical.
Q.
What Can I do if an Issuer Refuses to Allow me to Transfer my Shares?
A.
Unfortunately, you may need to get some legal help, and in extreme cases (I have only heard of this happening once) it may be necessary to go to court to force the issuer to accept your opinion letter.
I contacted Global Resource Corp and they sent me the following information on Mobilestream oil shares.
For every 7.14 shares of Mobilestream Oil (MSRM) that you own, you will receive 1 share of Global Resource Corp (GBRC). Additionally, you will receive 1 warrant of GBRC at a strike price of $4.75 for every 3 shares of MSRM that you own. (A warrant is the right to buy stock at a certain price). These securities that you will receive are being registered with the SEC in a SB2 filing. Once the filing has been declared effective by the SEC, then the exchange of shares will take place. We hope to have the filing declared effective by late summer 2007. You will get an instruction letter from the transfer agent, Olde Monmouth Stock Transfer, with direction on how to proceed on the exchange of shares.