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.
RCA: You claim to be Rodrigo Calderon, correct? You claim to have been defrauded by Paul Taylor among your many other claims. You claim loss because of PT. I read you claim to have you lost your job after Telatinos because of PT.
Why have you never filed a lawsuit against Paul Taylor?
EEE
Serf:
You sez...'the shareholders come knocking with their claims'.
Does this mean once again that a shareholder is actually and really filing a claim? I've heard this before...
What does this mean? "cause someone to be fired (CINDE)." I've only heard of this in passing on this board. Are you suggesting that PT had RCA fired? How could he do that. How could PT have the power to get him fired? What did he do?
You sez.."Then of course, when Rodrigo has nailed him on 4-5 of the above counts."
Has Rodrigo aka RCA actually sued Paul Taylor, the person? I see lots of lawsuits but I don't see one lawsuit where RCA actually sues Paul Taylor, the person.
WHY NOT?
It seems amazing be involved in all sorts of litigation and be suing, but not sue Paul Taylor considering the claims you've just made, assuming your speaking fairly for RCA. If PT is the target and assuming all these allegations, why not sue PT himself?
This is another extremely strange... missing link.
Explanations?
EEE
MD: You didnt win. You were beat in this round. What's up with the complex?
MD sez...'Beat Paul Taylor, I didn't know he was a party?!'
You've been saying "Paul and Corey, yada, yada..." for months. Now that you got clipped in Texas suddenly it changed?
MD sez...'Dismissal with prejudice only until New York is over then the bk can be brought again?'
Huh? 'With' or 'without'. Big difference. If 'with' it sounds like you're done. Even if not, sounds like they got their way.
MD sez...'why would anyone want to join New York. It's complicated and expensive?'
Complicated and expensive, YOU say? LMAO!
What's so complicated and what's so expensive for the pro se?
NY will probably determine who controls this shell, Marco or PT or other. Important! Especially if PT had his way with you in 2005. If someone wants to call PT or the Hedge to the mat, NY looks like an option.
MD sez...'But anyone else would have to be a fool. Do you know where the best place to file is? The court closest to you. Then you can walk there while PT takes a plane.'
Easy on the 'fool' advice or advice in general. If you're going to give it, it shouldn't be RESTRICTIVE. Tell people what they CAN do....OPTIONS. DON'T TELL then what NOT to do. I don't think you've earned that. Sorry guy.
I think your Texas charm was pretty close to foolish and had foolish missed chances. Fred Banks was a nice touch. Who thought of that? Court closest to you? Sure. Texas West wasn't closest to you. And, you don't know anyone filing anything anywhere except maybe your friends trying to skin the cat again.
If you do, let me know.
EEE
It RAINED...
Lessons learned? I'll try...
Straight Player: If you're a straight player, were defrauded, had the list of others defrauded, organized, were direct, you could have already had a Doug Black Colorado special rather than wasting your time for two years chatting. Play it straight. Seeking entertainment here to accompany your losses? That's entertaining too.
Non-PT BK claimant: If you're going to hang out on a message board, devote this much time, be productive and see #1 or just get a few PT affidavits. Failed both. Questionable failures considering the ease. WHAT THE...HELL?!
If BK claimants cleaning for PT: It didn't work.
If Paul was BK cleaning: Need more credible claimants.
Paul against BK claimants: He won, but only against them. It could have been tight if some did #1 or shareholders without reputation just filed a few affidavits.
Cheated, no affidavit, but claimed you KNEW Paul did it: SHAME ON YOU.
No affidavit cause you've grown to like Paul: I hope it's worth it. Major personal Compromise for which you will pay.
Telatinos Frauds: It's a tight game these days with close calls. Enough #1 and #2 and your travel might be restricted.
People just watching: It's not over. NY will either heat up or Marco will bail out. If they can get it into discovery, that's something. Criminal statute of limitations still green. Complaints, lawsuits, and afidavits still green.
Witnesses: If you missed this round, NY is active and so are other courts. Affidavits and witnesses could matter. But, will you do it? See above.
IMO, If MD were more forthcoming about his deep concern to BK while saying there is no money?? Have a hard time thinking PT is behind KM because he could have at least managed more plausible claims. But, MD ran this like he didn't want to bother PT. It doesn't make sense. So, following the theory of Occam's razor like some here do:
MD just couldn't beat PT. MD couldn't get anyone to draft a single affidavit about 2005 which could have attacked the NY action and PT's interest in NY. MD and friends failed to get the tools they needed because they didnt ask. Why? Either because they're not persuasive or they're too smart for help.
EEE
Sly...
I hear ya about the other stock. Sounds like a Paul-usual.
I don't think you understood my emphasis about the Netco lawyer. No emphasis on the lawyer properly withdrawing to avoid disciplinary action. Don't care about that.. beside the point. Point was: Someone thought they have/had authority to get a lawyer for a public. He could have represented himself, individually. He did not. He hired for the public, for the corporation. Not anyone can hire a lawyer AND take a LEGAL POSITION for a public company.
No way. It's about authority. You know the rules.
Dont agree with you on the statute. I think that's well settled, personally.
Totally agree with your last comments about Paul/control.
Your sentiments about BK cleaning the 'mud' and debenture notes fit the theory that Paul might be VERY HAPPY with the BK (if it stays under control).
Assuming you're correct about Paul always getting control, that raises TWO BIG QUESTIONS:
1. Do you think he's covertly supporting the claimants and this BK for the outcome you discussed?
OR...
2. Do you think he's supporting the hedge funds and wants it dismissed, thus opposing the BK?
Big difference.
I have to say... this question has me interested.
EEE
100% chance of Rain...
Sly, that sounds like a garden variety penny stock. Not to say it's not PT...could be. He manages to keep his hands in. I'd guess he runs dark pref. stock agreements in his pinks to maintain control or shall we say 'spring' the control when needed.
Sly, what may be of interest to you is the non-discussed discussion going on here about PT appearing in NY litigation through Netco's lawyer, firing Netco's lawyer and taking a legal position, then withdrawing.
This issue strikes a nerve with some. Some tried hard to suggest PT was not a control person or a majority in this stock. I didn't buy it. As you know, he always seems to regain control after every name change. It's a 'Duh' concept by 2007.
Then the NY litigation showed PT's face. How can a non-control person hire or fire a Netco lawyer. This = BIG. It should be a big question raised in Texas. It could raise many questions about why a non-insider bank seems to act as if its the company itself while the two people who asserted control, PT and Marco are totally absent in Texas. Been ignored mostly by the claimants.
I think it's possibile Paul is fine with the Texas action if it can clean the old convertible weight off his shell. Shine it up for a new deal in the future. Can't be doubted it's at least motive. If you read posts of REKNAWXAM who people thought was the man, he even wrote that. This was posted this week. Guess what? No one said a word. He said BK can remove old 'mud' converts off the shell. He said this on another board. If he thinks that, BK makes sense. But he can't file it. Speculation suggests you need 'cleaners' for that. It is a possibility with plenty of motives.
So, if the claimants were really opposed to PT, they have about 7 excellent tools they have conspicuously not used not in Texas. Months of non-use. You also have pro-se professionals on this board. Yet no pro-se fraud claim when the company is not answering mail? That's an easy default like Doug Black got. All you had to do was lock the judgment, send it to Florida or to BK court and you have a huge tool I think. The pro-se pros could have made this a very cheap endeavor for their '2005 shareholder friends'.
But, some people think PT is against the BK. Thats the rub here. There's some public theater showing PT doesnt like the claimants. I dont't buy it. It's a little too 'theatrical'. The claimants suggest PT favors the old convertible notes? I don't buy that either.
The claimants could PROVE they are really acting against PT by their actions in Texas. So far I dont see it. We'll see.
EEE
Sly...
Nice post again.
I will check BNPD, thank you.
I often wonder if Brian and Esper are here.
OK City, pouplar destination.
4 penny players.
EEE...
[EDIT] MD: Life is a bitch...
This reminds me. Over the past few years I have run into tales of various pennys, companies, and people who get themselves involved in fraud on courts. Sometimes they lose defaults to their associates on breached contracts, yet they collect quickly. LoL.
Your friends here are accused of that somwhat. But, people around here say that PT's a fraud and you seem to play along. But you don't act on anything said.
Sometimes things don't add up. In litigation, because of its nature, it's usually very clear where everyone stands a month in.
That still doesn't apply here. Not at all. It's a mixed motives mess.
You pull punches while getting cleavered. Your excuse for pulling punches is not convincing. As you know litigation can be a tool and the true objective not being plain to the naked eye. Like the breached contracts, defaults and payouts in the other companies I discussed above. The court thought it was a breached contract. The plaintiff later gets stock from the CEO and laughs to the bank... with the CEO.
There could be many covert reasons for litigation. Maybe to remove some barnacales. Maybe to rid other obligation. Maybe to shake people down. Maybe to steal a shell.
You have to acknowledge this possibility if you're straight. I'm not saying it applies to you and your friend and PT... but it could.
I've been following this company off and on for years. Read many boards. You're new and you're very interested. Great. Yet you pull punches in litigation and your actions dont always match up with what people 'say' or 'shareholders want to hear'. Where are all the 'angry shareholders' from a few months ago knowing the BK was coming right up? Fine time to leave isn't it.
Seems the board is now dominated by non-shareholder claimants and that match of wits.
I thought you were known as a straight shooter. Not sure about that. I think the straight story more interesting if you might want to PM it to me.
LoL
[EDIT] OK. Don't take one thing I say and focus on that. That was the weakest point, just an discussion option. It was a simle possibility. I DON'T think you are stealing the shell. I think better chance you are helping proxy for Paul to clean the shell and walk. Or you are doing it out of spite. I think the later is the best possibility. But, spite from what is the real question. Marco? NY?
EEE
The Hounds that Don't Bark....
I'm sure you all know that crime mystery, eh?
I read what is written and not written. Most of what I learn on a public board is from what is not said by people who should say it. That is the theme of this particular board.
I see more than just gaps as pointed out. I see complete failures to both make points and respond to points made against you.
Major: You are getting whacked by litigants. You get whacked, KM gets whacked, Fred Banks...whacked. You get named and conspiracy is alleged against you...little you. You say you're protected in litigation to make your response claims and connect your dots about them too. But do you?
Where do any of you accuse the funds as acting for Paul. Where do any of you weave your intricate tale as they have done to you. Where is your story that you'd rather discuss here 'just a little'? Where is your conspiracy bewteen Paul and the lenders going back years. Where are all your 'bulletin board' accusations? Where are the allegations of your new friend here and his entire 2005, 2006 experience?
It seems a HARD task for you NOT to make it. It must be a TASK not trip over one 2005 defrauded shareholder who is willing to tell the Paul story. How'd you pull that off after months on this board leading up to a hearing this week?
It must be a hard task to hold back your accusations that NIR is making arguments only suitable for the company or Paul. It must be a task NOT to point out Paul appearance and disappearance in NY litigation and draw a conclusion. It must be hard not to raise the personal loans and allege a concert of efforts to quiet it all.
It must be hard to hold all this back.
You wouldn't want the judge to put this in bankruptcy for some reasons, do you. You may want it in, but you don't want it there under any circumstance.
That's totally obvious. Anyone with a thimble of common sense can figure that out.
You're either protecting people or you just like missing the opportunity to tell your A story or even B story while you're getting cleavered by the opposing law firms.
Which is it?
Dont tell me you're better lawyers. You're not. Dont tell me that its scandel to suggest the concert of interest that you believe and allege here. Don't tell me you can't tell Serf's story as he told the boards, signed and dated. It's free and it's everywhere. But, you stay quiet. They just linked you all as criminals and frauds in a conspiracy. Are you saying their evidence is better than yours and therefore they can make the allegations but you can't?
Nevermind.
You found a way to tie your own hands behind your back by talking defrauded shareholders OUT of helping you with an affidavit of Paul's 2005 actions. You talked them out of giving you what you dont have....credibility.
That hound that never barked says it all.
EEE
Ergo: Let me guess....
Hmmm.
Is that an allegation or a question? There's always someone like you who make people repeat. So, I will repeat this for the last time and I'm done...
I repeat myself so you dont try and distract people with conspiracy theories before the hearing. I want MD to win. I want an ind. trustee to be appointed. Simple.
I'm not a shareholder and never was a shareholder of this company in any incarnation. That closes your inference about '300 Mercer' or any other name or address associated with this stock. I know and have seen hundreds. You could play that game for months. I haven't seen you put together more than off beat thoughts. No real DD or connecting dots. If you do, let me know.
You could have learned more about the real names and address of importance if you paid attention to the other board in 2005. But even that information is subservient to Paul Taylor and the jumping of the stock for attraction and dumping on PR's for months after. You don't need a conspiracy and mystery addresses dropped by you on the board.
Maybe 'Ciao Brian' is of interest too. But Paul Taylor is the core.
This is simple. People who avoid the simplicity may be doing Paul R. Taylor a huge favor.
You may make him so happy he'll get out his metronome, paddle, dental floss, head down to 40 Wall and call Holly.
(now run your search on that)
LoL
EEE
Ind. trustee. Yes....
Everyone here should want this in the hands of an ind. trustee. I don't think anyone disputes. You can be suspicious of Marco's claims, Keith's claims, Fred's claims and Rodrigo's claims and the fund's claims.
Doesn't matter. They're not exclusive. You can be all that and still want you to win the motion and get the trustee.
I do.
I'd like to see the odds of getting an ind. trustee that decides to dig into everyone.
Sometimes I think this became a farse because so many obvious points were not made maybe midway through. Many people here could have really helped MD and the claimants with 30 minutes of their time. They didn't do it.
So, it is possible that someone changed their mind. It can be converted to 11 too but this is cheaper and still could be effective. If Paul ends up being the majority or control shareholder and he can use BK to shuck the islanders, then maybe he gets what he wants...a clean shell and better leverage with 'lenders'. The industry innovates. Maybe Paul wants this to clean his shell for another lending innovation.
There is also risk involved in that adventure. Maybe that changed some minds. Maybe Paul didnt pay back all his loans and doesn want any questions. If you say Paul is with AJW and crew then all he had to do was count his votes, assert his parallel new officers and work with AJW to defeat all. He didnt, did he? I doubt that's because he's scared some Costa Ricans claim fraud. No one else has. A new officer not named Paul Taylor elected by Paul Taylor could then take it up with Texas. Didnt do it.
Then you have a better chance of avoiding the 'no one's in control it must have a trustee' argument. Paul didn't do that either to help his funds. What makes you think he's with AJW?
EEE
UNREAL....
Now talking about loans is a 'trap'.
Set by who, Serf? You're accusing people of setting traps by discussing DD, particularily personal loans taken by PT.
That's a bold and nonsense claim.
You also claim that if the loan was given to an officer or a consultant makes some significant difference if the company attempted to collect it. You are in bankruptcy, aren't you? A loan is a loan. A contract is a contract. If an officer or consultant takes the loan makes no difference regarding paying it back. Since you're in bankruptcy, its obvious why that's important. How can you ask that with a straight face? In any type of bankruptcy credits and debts are accounted. An upaid loan to the shareholders (company) would have to accounted.
It's mystifying that you would argue about this or try to pretend some serious difference exists. (Or worse that its an evil plot....yet another). Why are the good DD people always the evil ones? You were given great DD.
Yet you complain. Great board. I guess this is the very bottom of the pubic markets.
EEE
Got it. Know it. Have it. Wow.
Hey, ergo sum. What's your story. Do you know anything about Netco? If so, what.
Stockefeller sounded like a real fighter for a full year. No claim? I miss his one sentence posts. But I still have ergo.
MD: have the funds followed up on their "MD-KM allegations"? Is Marco going to seal his identity papers or has he disappeared again?
PT's loans: They were also posted on RB back in the dayz. They were ignored by the Tela-lovers. Even the huge loans. Who could ignore the desruction of all those prior companies, the fraud lawsuit, the lien, and the personal loans? I'd like to hire these people for my cult. Its impossible to ignore the loans now while filing BK. Maybe its time for the court to be apprised. Maybe someone here will send the court a letter pointing out all the SEC filings showing the personal loan contracts with Paul.
MD: Your friends have the only claims. Those loan documents are rather convincing little barking dogs. Count me as amazed if you dont attach some bells and whistles to those documents. You didn't even know about them, did you.
How well do you know Fred Banks. Is there anything you could tell us about him to add some depth to his name? I've seen information on the internet. What do you have. Do you like him. Is he a nice guy. Do you talk with him often?
How about Keith. You say he's your friend. How often do you two talk. Do you asist him with his Hayter litigation or is he better at it than you.
Scoville: did you see the RedRiver NMKT Verge thing? That ran through .30. I gave you my thoughts on that debenture. It was clear as day a year ago. No related party transactions filed with the SEC but the CEO owns the private company holding the note with his public company!? Scoville, come on.
What are you doing loving a company with an unspoken insider-affiliate note running red? Where do you think CEO makes more money? From the company or the note. Do you ever wonder.
If I lost money on that stock in the last two years, I'd have an MD special drafted up and ready to file.
MD: what do you know about getting back a domaign name you lost because your host didn't renew? I have a friend in that spot. He wants to skip the fight with the host and just get the name back from the broker.
Polka: Do you follow this litigation and company?
EEE
Serf:
You said..
"My point is, if my name or my company name were to appear on envelopes, or be attached in any way to documents that related to Netco / Privada et al without my permission, I would very much like to know about it."
If you really want to know the answers to your question why are the answers missing? Can't people answer your questions around here?
I have copies. Someone will post them to RB. Also have some posts for MD. I think he should pay attention. You guys really slowed down two board on IHUB to a halt. Doesnt seem very fun of you. You said you were here for 'entertainment' purposes only.
http://ragingbull.quote.com/mboard/boards.cgi?board=NCVT
I read the PT loan personal loan information in the IBOX. I can't believe MD hasnt commented on this. No one else has either?
Creditors not commenting on cash assets of the company loaned to Paul Taylor and they're in bankruptcy?
LMAO.
EE
TTGOP: LMAO! Now that's the best post of the month. Let me guess, more smokey backroom alluding still two years later??
I'm with you.
Everything should be public and right on this board. Less chance for manipulations and games if its done where the sunshine shines.
I've read some of your posts on your profile. If I were you, I'd call the court directly and get you claim information. If it's really that easy and only one page.....
...why not?
Who knows what may happen with this?
I ponder why people are getting on you. Last I checked a month ago, there was a much larger amount of people saying they were going to get their justice. I read a lot of tough talk.
Some people even said they were filing their claims. I havent seen one filed yet by a 2005 shareholder.
The tough talkers just up and disappeared from this board within the last 30-45 days. That's unlikely considering the litigation circumstances, IMO.
Luck on, TT.
EEE
Serf: I would like to know more about this pitney affair. What is your theory on this? Did PT tell you that documents were being sent to NY from a postage meter in your name. When did he tell you this. You reported this to the US Mail?
Did you ever learn anything....
Do you think someone highjacked your name for a devious purpose. If so, what could possibly be the reason to involve you and what's your theory on who did it. You don't think it's Paul, do you. After all you talk to him and he told you.
Let's find out who did it. There are ways. Whoever did this must be deeply involved if you claim this is a fraud. But, what's the point. Why take the risk. What's the reward.
I dont understand how you find the time or desire to talk with PT anyway, but that's another question. How can you do that while also saying you're talking to regulators about him? That's not normal.
Also, what does this mean. Didn't you say this person is PT. What do you think he meant by this post...
http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.asp?message_id=20394116
This next one is for Major....comments?
http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.asp?message_id=20087311
EEE
You know something, Serf. Myself and lot of people relied on information in 2005 and information after you turned against PT in '06. In my case, I didnt rely on it for 'accuracy' but just that the actual conversations and PT representations did occur. That this wasnt just a distant anonymous press release game.
Thats an important distinction to make. All of the information taken together provides a clear picture of what happened. I think we may have some ground of agreement.
This is in no way an attack and should not be viewed that way. You said you relied on him and his information too. So, in that sense, you're in the same place.
But the distinction is you did have direct conversations with PT while most did not. That's just a fact. Are you aware of anyone besides you and Frank that actually talked to PT on the telephone at any length? Do you know why he didnt call other people?
There are cases of people trying to contact him and posting about their lack of success. Do you have a feeling about why PT didn't return their calls but did return yours?
I've read your posts and you obviously view yourself as a key person because of these conversations.
I want to say I agree.
EEE
ACCESS, ACCESS, ACCESS....
That's how they played it through the entire Telatinos dump. Private phone calls, whispers and secrets. This has been going on since the beginning and it continues unabated. There is a reason for this, of course.
PT plays the same way. Everything is wrapped in mystery and a whisper. A long, winding story bordering on grand conspiracy. Dramatic and fantastic. Grand and devious enemies. You must be silent and conspire to defeat the evil, he'll say. That 'evil' in 2005 on the Telatinos board was actualy good people telling truth to power. Power in that case was a system designed to take money in a fraudulent way and the people contributing to the system. Good people were attacked relentlessly to protect the system. Trust me, the system continues. Fraud is organic.
Justice doesnt need silent conspiring, cheap seats and expensive seats. Serf, you had PT's expensive seats, FRONT ROW, in 2005. How much in losses did those seats get you? Sleepless nights, wasted time, less money at least you said. Sounds like a losing proposition.
Exposing stock frauds isn't a delicate, behind the scenes game. It's blunt, honest and public. At least when it's successful. I would deeply suspect anyone that didnt agree. Most stock frauds keep a close eye on the scene of their crimes. SEC investigations have proven and common sense dictates that these personalities linger and linger and linger. They will linger in public, wolf in sheeps clothing, with one goal in mind, PROTECTING THEIR INTERESTS.
We all already know that PT somehow seems to get back control of this shell after each dump. You may scratch your heads about the details. But, you see ALL the company names and symbols and you KNOW he gets it back what percent of the time?
100%
So, if this probability and statistic continues there is a strong likelyhood that PT is here right now among you. Definitely through proxy, but definitely here.
Anyone favoring, ONCE AGAIN, dividing people into groups accessible to information and ONCE AGAIN playing access and fake secret orgainzation games about a public company are DOOMED to either misuse this information as they did in 2005. Or worst case, they are proxies for PT planning the next 100% probability of return to control.
Also worth considering: Anyone who compromised themselves in some way through access or otherwise in 2005 should absolutely not be 'leading' shareholders. They should help if their intentions are legitimate. But, once you're compromised you're compromised. If Frank had promoted, taken his shares, but under pressure recanted his friendship for PT and asked to lead an effort against PT, would you trust him? The probablity and statistics say 'NO'. Let him contribute and ask him to contribute, but dont depend on him for anything. Dont turn your back. Ask yourself why what he's saying does not match his actions. Be smart.
I thought people learned their lessons. I see the same people repeating the same sytematic mistakes as in 2005.
EEE
Syl: PT should be put out of business if not the country. Some might have the power to do that. Depends on their level of interest and backbone.
A few people here have relentless daily two year interest. Im just checking in for backbone...
;)
EEE
LoL, Syl. You're still the playa deep down inside!
The claim process was geared more toward the accoutiblity part of the deal. I told Serf if you're going to sit here complaining about PT for a year you may as well file a claim and affidavit. The BK is already filed. He has people doing all the work for him. All a shareholder has to do is fill out a piece of paper and see what happens. Why not.
Maybe that limited publicity and court filing will serve some purpose someday. It's the right thing to do especially if you took part in the dark side for a full year even if you were be being fooled. It still happened.
BTW, the post I tried to post was one of your classics about how someone could still be a Taylor lover after they read the fraud judgment, saw the ouystanding liens, etc.. It was a great post. Too bad.
At your own risk, Syl. Remember the new plays today arent traditional P&D. They start high and slow bleed on a toxic note. P&D's are for amateurs in addittion to the cost of doing business today, namely letting people like you take a free ride!
LoL
E
Syl: Wouldn't miss an opportunity...
... to say hello to you!
We had this right all along. I tried to post one of your great posts from 2005 but it disppeared. There's a long list of 'remeberance' or rather, evidence posts by on RB. You have a few.
Waiting for people to file their claims as they claimed. I dont see one. NONE. ZERO. Wonder why Snerfdom is so quiet lately. He was so hopped up a month ago. Where's Hoppy-lad? RKD? Euro-Auto?
This is a Maydak-Sussman thing. Expect lots of dead trees.
I hear a rumor that a private and wellfunded Foundation is investigating a series of connected and widespread securities highjackings, forgery, and identity theft.
That's interesting, isnt' it?
EEE
[Edit FOUR xs]MD/Serf: MD: If you're asking me, I'll say this. I think there is more to this one. I believe this one was part of bigger things to come.
I could be wrong.
That DEA bust was interesting.
E
Serf: No. I mean facts about Corey tampering with your Fedex account. The real rumor and implication is that you are preemptively lying about this to cover up a certain Pitney mailing experience.
You will not be surprised to learn I dont believe you. So, lets see these fake facts you have about 'Fedex'. You've got nothing but fantasy claims. I think you thought about THIS particular claims for a while. Dont you see how obvious you're become?
EEE
AND...
I'd love to stay and chat, but I can't. People in high places may listen to people like EVEN, but because internet stock moderators on penny stocks listen to Serf whine, I'm down to 3 posts. Dont like managed news anyway. The real record is on RB.
EEEEEE
AND...
Sweetie, yeppers? Does this man-girl have any real friends that aren't monikers on stock boards?
AND...
"associates"? Give it up insider-boy. You sell T-Shirts and penny stock ads. You have been trying to get out of this for a year. You want everyone to shut up and forget about what you did on Netco. The only reason you JUMPED was because I and others visited you again. Now, you can barely recognize you. You're jumping show-boy.
EEEEEEEEE
MD: Wrong. The SEC is doing an increasingly good enforcement job with penny fraud. Rumor has it that they even follow the writings of many self-styled bashers and websites.
Ask Serf how many fraudulent companies were SHUT DOWN by SEC enforecment WHILE, his nemisis 'EVEN' from Ragingbull, was posting on their resepctive boards and communicating directly with the SEC. 3, 4 in just a few years. The last one, USWF was flipped in under a year. They're getting fast.
Serf knows.
He went to USWF to raise their spirits because basher EVEN was there. Serf was one of the biggest and most shameless RB pumpers for years. Worse, he did it in the face of the strongest EVEN evidence of fraud. Serf says he has changed, but that change would naturally ackowledge that EVEN was correct for years while Serf had it wrong. Instead, Serf still insists he has the credibility to form judgments. Now, he's making the same insider protective mistakes like getting the statute of limitations wrong. (Sure).
Rumor has it that 'EVEN' is well regarded by the right people.
EEEEE
Another BIZARRE claim by Snerf against Corey. Snerf, do you have any FACTS to back up your claims?
Hiding information about direct communications with pricipals of the company is Serf's special skill.
Serf hid AceDugan@iprive. He also denied it. I have the proof in his own post.
He denied, disclaimed, and later backed off FatCatsPoker. Why? Because he's defensive by nature, lots of hiding. Acedugan was associated to poker in 2005. He killed that address recently. Then, up popped another poker tournament. He denied that and sent some girl over to say it was hers website? Her email address? @Serfs'sPennyStockWebsite.com
His refusal to EVEN post a TIMELINE of his communications with Paul Taylor as "main witness" is proof enough he is covering up HIS role. It's that obvious now. His only job is to make sure no one suspects WHY he is really doing NOTHING at the end of the day. That's it. That's why he's here.
He claims he is the number one witness to an active federal case, but he will TOU this post 10 times until its gone because he will not help the shareholders is reality. He's going to be as loud as possible about being quiet. This post does not violate th TOU when you UNDERSTAND his witness status to original, non-duplicative evidence about a securities fraud.
EEE
Well hiiiiii there Serfdom..did I mention you were people marked?! :) Did you see my website. Go look. I like you! Hey did I mention I like you? Go see my website. I like candles. Did I mention my website? I'm smiling at you. With candles too! Will you people mark me? You never know about those pinks! Hey bob, I LIKE you. I'm going to make a price prediction. Hi WTC! How about 100% bob? Lots of shares, Bob! I like you, you're smart. I like candles! People are interested. You can see the candles! Did you see my website? It's right there. You're people marked bob! Did I say that? I'm a realist bob! and I like candles. I don't pump pinksheets! No way! We don't do that. ***I predict 100%***! I like you. 1000%!? You're a pumper! We dont pump pinksheets! :) We have a system. Analysis!! I'm smiling at you. :) 200% prediction OK! Im a realist! You could double your net! 2,000% Stop pumping! We're real. 200%! Look at the interest here! I like you! Did you see my website? :) Wait Todd! I like you. No Todd. Please? Todd Im smiling at you! Come here Todd. Hug? No? I HATE YOU TODD!! Good luck you'll need it TODD!
Sorry Todd, Wait!
TOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOODDDDDDDDDD????????????????????
Tiptoe to other board.....(shhh)
Hi Todd. What's up? Wacha doin? Just hanging out myself. Look, Todd. Todd....... Listen. OK forget it. Just don't say anything bad Todd. Ok?
Back to Fat Cats....
Just chattin with my buddy Todd! Todd's great! Realists are 100%-200%! The pumpers are crazy!! 10,000%!? No way pumpers! I like you anyway!! I like candles (bubble thought: 400 people marks yet? No? Damn! Who do I have to BLANK around here for 400?)
Hi guys! Is 300% credible!? You're people marked! Did you hear that PEOPLE MARKED I said!
ROTFLMAO
E
Scoville/MD: Sco: You still mad about NMKT?
MD: Too bad you got banned. If you would like to know why I have been absent, ask you-know-who Paul's once and possibly still best friend. After making a single complaint about someone accusing me of being an ex-CEO, I was punished. LMAO.
Down to a few posts per day. Quite restrictive.
That's quite alright with me because as we all KNOW, the real record is contained elsewhere. You-know-who reads RB everyday watching for which ghost may pop up next.
EEEE
E] Oddity?
That's not an oddity, that's a flaming roast of inescapable truth leaving people with a mouth full of marbles. The Fact or Fiction board will likey end up being the only place you can post the truth and have real dialoge regarding Netco.
The Vera Frank Netco information is incredible. Who would ever want to withhold information FROM A KNOWN WIDOW that could help or at least clarrify things for an unrelated widow!? Who would say such a thing? Who would do such a thing?
Hopefully, soon, we will all know more....
Meanwhile the RB Netco board assures straight talk.
EEEEE
Wow.
Wow.
Are you kidding me?
Did someone just write this in public.....'LOL, yeah, a pro se fraud case against attorneys hired by Ribotsky.'
What the hell is going on here. Is this really happening? Yes, it is. Is this an attempt to dissuade with false information. If I am wrong, I'll admit it tomorrow. Call Corey tomorrow and ask his if he will interfere with a case you file against PT or Netco for the acts of 2005. Call him. Ask. Their lawyers numbers are right there. Call them. One phone call. Can you make a phone call?
Who would like to make a little legal wager? I wager that Serf knows, because I and others have said it a thousand times, if he files or any shareholder files, NO ONE WILL SHOW UP IN COURT to defend the past actions of Telatinos or Paul Taylor. Did Paul show up for Black in Colorado? Nope. Call Doug Black and ask him how 'hard' it was to get a default, how many man hours it took, and how many DAYS... (days)
Why would some people here and NOW set up PHANTOM issues between you and Paul/Telatinos.
Janus.
E
LMAO. NO DECLARATION. NO LAWYER. NO PRO SE.
Too busy?
You post Vera's emails but no one else can talk about it.
If you say Paul is a fraud, how can you say he's truthful about other things? It was not me that said the person that ran this fraud is 70% truthful. Not me at all.
If I had talked to Paul throughout 2005, you can BET you'd see my declaration. I dont let Brits walk all over me.
I guess we'll get a bunch of posts about Yazoo tonight instead of a declaration or a small pro se claim.
Nice work.
E
The only Very Revealing matter in the last few days pertains to the most important matter:
Layers. Litigation.
I was told on this board in the last few days by a particular person..His lawyer must be hired today, Tuesday before noon. I waited and waited for this person to bring it up in any way before noon.
Nothing. Not one word. Never even got the lawyers name.
E
http://ragingbull.quote.com/mboard/boards.cgi?board=NCVT&newpost=1
Perhaps, perhaps, perhaps...
Interesting Monday. But,
Still no Affidavit.
No writ filed against Madison for Netco records.
Vamp creditor states officer has abandoned Netco.
No information regarding Saffell offered for credibility.
Rodrigo asking Serf for Texas SOS records? Eh-hem.
Madison is nothing more than an EX Transfer Agent. No need to beat them up. No need for them, at all, to BE an officer and ACT like an officer. A writ would get Netco their records, but the gang of litigious didn't file that writ, did they? Shareholders could probably make noise for records through the articles and Texas law. No noise.
Major Damage discovered something interesting in Colorado.
What's a 'ledger'. I mean...what do YOU think a ledger is? You can't blame Madison for failures now. Like I said, they're nothing more than ex-TA's. That doesn't stop Marco from acting in his 'capacity', if he has any. Did Netco even send Madison a letter DEMANDING the records officially? I doubt it. If so, what date? Should that be scanned for shareholders. I thought some people wanted to solve the past.
If there are shareholders here, besides the usual, did you call Madison and ask them how they could not turn this vital information over to Netco while this matter is pending in fed court and fraud has been alleged by ex/current officers? A lien is one thing, but certain facts can overcome their claim to possess records on a monetary debt!
What has Major Damage said about the ability to seek disovery now, while the case sits in bankruptcy. I'd imagine creditors and claimants might have some tools they can use now. Maybe not. Bet MD would know in under 5 minutes. The Madison records should be on the list.
Did Marco suprise Serf and declare himself in control tonight? I assumed these guys worked together off the board for the last months, exchanging information to serve everyone's interests. Imagine my surprise when square 1 questions were asked on the board.
No follow-up on the lawyer people had in mind on Saturday night. I guess Monday is a bad day to discuss it. I have the pleasure to be here with all these pro se folks and no one has discussed the possibilty of a pro se action for fraud on the SHAREHOLDER'S behalf?
Rod says the shares would be restricted if he issued them. But, I wonder what he thinks they would be if Joe Blow issued them?
E
RCA: Louie Saffell. It's been days since I asked about his background, education, and information to verify that he's a real American citizen in good standing, accredited, etc..
His college/university and graduation year would be one way to do it. Better would be posting his CV or resume. He is a consultant to a public comapany wrapped in various litigation, after all. Therefore, everyone's credibility is important. This should have been an easy request.
Come on, guy.
E
[E]That's crazy, but it only proves that there is noting proved yet. Did Paul take his savings or was Frank experienced 17b and Vera is lost.
But, purchase contracts lying around and denial of money transferred?
He sounded too slow to me. He sounded like a victim to me.
No facts.
IMO
Serf: You have to tell the people if Paul got things smoothed out with you and Franks blow-out battle in late February 2005. You could piece this together with just that. You did a 180 to Frank while you were talking to Paul. Did Paul make that happen?
Where the hell have these posts been for the last year? The trickle has to end. This shite is in court!
E
Serf: Are you saying that Paul cleaned Frank out?
"You will probably find numerous stock purchase agreements between Myself and Frank. None have been paid for."
Why would he have the agreements and not pay the cash. That sounds shady.
'I stopped chasing it'
Was makes the least sense is that Paul sent these FACTS that could be used against him to YOU, after you were 'mad'
Shit.
E
Paul sent these emails to you?
No way.
E
You say...'We can see Frank pumping the boards.'
Whoa, buddy, he wasn't the only one. Not very fair, is it. He was a terrible interent pumper. Frank was old school. Phones. He couldn't type.
But, you have to tell us what did PAUL tell you about the PRs?
NASDAQ?
AUDITED FINANCIALS?
BANK LOANS?
REVENUES?
That's the thing now, isn't it?
E
A good claim depending on witnesses will probably have to address the timeline and maybe some gaps too.
Do you know your timeline, gaps, and you can you explain some missing elements?
http://ragingbull.quote.com/mboard/boards.cgi?board=NCVT&read=187
This link can probably be explained. It's a tough way to look at it, but someone might get tough. You have to be ready for people who might challenge you. That is basic.
E
You also MUST KNOW your witnesses if your filing a claim based on their testimony. I don't know how comfortable I would be unless I had a few questions answered first. That's basics. You do not want suprises later. You don't want someone saying, 'well Rodrigo also did THIS when he was president' and have yourself caught off guard.
More info here. This was disclaimed once to me. It cant be disclaimed, however, because someone may ask about it...
http://ragingbull.quote.com/mboard/boards.cgi?board=NCVT&read=188
Key is to know your witnesses. That's why I asked ROD some tough questions.
E
13489 was all about the litigation options. I thought there was no chance it would be deleted. It must have been a mistake. I think you tried to delete another one and missed.
You must draft the timelines and have your best witnesses explain the whole timeline. That is FIRST.
E
You must asses not only the witness declaration but also the possibility of a cheap and fast Doug Black default judgment.
E