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.
And procure land in Vegas.
How many shares came thru a Commerzbank trading account?
By the way, why don't some of you suggest Kyle Burns contact Stew, ask Stew why he's so quiet for a guy who is going to be uber-rich if shorty has to cover.
Why would Megas sponsor Sytner?
Do you understand how much cash Lido, Stew, and his cohorts had at one time? You only need a contract showing you can guarantee delivery. As an insider, pretty easy to make that contract (real or forged).
Lido likes to forge stuff.
the only way any broker should accept waiting a whole year for the shares is if Megas sponsored Sytner, then the brokers MIGHT accept a letter of credit signed by the issuer of the shares which was Megas.
however, the hole in your theory is that the DTC is claiming the extra shares are counterfeit, and wants Megas to issue shares directly to cover them.
Right, they saw what appeared to be an illegal short position mysteriously covered to the tune of 240 million shares. Why would the DTCC not expect otherwise on the rest? Do you see any other lawsuits against supposed short sellers by Megas?
Win a legal judgment showing someone else is illegally short and then go talk to the DTCC. Go legally prove those additional shares are fraudulently issued and then demand why the DTCC wanted Megas to cover. It's all about the legal judgment.[/B]
I would say no. Other than custody, the DTC, with the help of the NASD, dumped this back into the hands of the brokerages.
NASD even told the brokerages to verify their share positions with the Transfer Agent.
That why I keep posting: Have the Transfer Agent notify anyone if there is a failure to deliver. There has been no notification yet. No "blue-sheet" warning to all broker-dealers.
Timeline schminline..
Masta. In the eyes of the S.E.C., once Megas stated there were counterfeit shares, the issue becomes a civil legal issue between Tom's company and those who defrauded him.
When Tom has to deliver 240 Million shares for what looked like an illegal short position, that left everyone scratching their heads.
Who is to say that Tom does not bail someone else out? That's why updated financials are mandatory before anyone will even work with the company.
Tom needs to force the brokers to show where they got their shares from. Track those trades backwards to the source.
I'm not trashing the stock. I'm pointing out Megas' blunders.
What I find hard to understand is why any shareholder would trash a stock they hold shares in
I have made suggestions. I'm repeatedly misquoted, attacked as being a non-shareholder, supposedly short, today I am possibly bitter at a past deal (good one wildbill).
Sytner does not strike me as being that kind of person...
Are you dead serious? He ran a bogus off-shore bank. His directors have been charged with selling counterfeit life insurance policies, he ran a bogus Palm Oil shell deal with no license in Papua New Guinea, he claimed to be a diplomat of the PNG, and his most recent "accomplishment" was helping a group of people scam Sentinel Funds for $20 Million, which is now a federal investigation.
Punish Sytner?
He would have the converted shares to cover any short sales he and his friends passed thru.
Even worse, those restricted shares are now aged enough to be free trading.
Sadly molson, No.
I think this will end up in legal hell between the company and the brokers. Unless my Stewart info turns out to be even worse than expected.
Correct, but Jeffries and Company were allowed to not only process those trades based upon future delivery of stock, they were also never fined for hiding 111 billion short sales on the tape.
You also will see that Vince LoCastro was never charged for dumping over 2.2 Billion PCBM ex-clearing also thru Jeffries and Company.
why on earth would the SEC and the DTC and FINRA and the NYSE suspend the buy-in this long and not allow the market to "punish" or expose the short-sellers? cuz allowing
Because they were only short until they were able to deliver shares to close out their position. If you see, the global lock prevents anyone from trading this stock here in the U.S. and offshore. Gee glazman, why would the SEC be concerned about offshore BCIT trades?
of course i did, where would that CASH come from?
IDK, the settlement funds from JH Darby/Capital Growth? Maybe from the $800k Megas supposedly has spent on legal fees here?
cash would be hard to come by if the co. isn't trading o r doing biz
But Megas supposedly has huge assets.
you still cannot esplain how a broker can legally allow several hundred million short from insider or non-insiders on an OS of 4 million...
Easy. Everyone thought there was 4 million O/S until Megas mysteriously issues 240 Million plus shares for what amounted to pennies on the dollar. Now, who knows what the real issued number is until Megas actually files updated financials that he signs off on. Prove to the SEC that those massive issuances are still in Tom's and Stewart's hands as of 10/21/2009.
Gee, any agencies demanding proof of updated holdings via updated financials?
Cannacord.
Guess where Stewart and his buddies had the Sentinel funds passed thru?
Cannacord.
Ever seen Cannacord listed as a repeated short sale violator? Even seen them fined for allowing customers to bypass the margin requirements?
Correct glazman..you would have needed to short sell into volume before the halt in order to do this.
the short-selling had to occur in 2005
The month before the halt would have been the perfect time to do so. See any massive volume before the halt?
Then all you need are more issued shares in order to cover those shorted shares from offshore. See anyone get more shares? First, newly issued shares because of the supposed loss in share structure after having to ahem...issue 240 million shares to two broker dealers.
Second, because of ahem...expenses racked up on some crazy lawsuit. Ever wonder why Stew was issued so many shares instead of his loans paid back in cash?
you're making this stuff up out of thin air...
I gave you an example of where someone else has pulled this off before.
Glazman,
besides, Stewie could not be sure to get the shares in 2005, the shares he was issued were much later and they were preferred, not tradeable.
Of course Stew could guarantee receiving additional shares.
what was the final disposition of the Sentinel Case against Stewie ? what i saw looked like a dismissal.
The plantiffs moved to dismiss on the motion the civil case was being picked up on a federal level. The original case was in civil court with zero guarantee of ever collecting on a judgment. The case was picked up by federal investigators who have the legal ability to freeze and recoup funds hidden in offshore banks.
the SEC would be prefering NS charges like they have been doing to others.
It's not NSS if you short against your own guaranteed shares. Nor is it illegal as long as you deliver shares at some point. See the Edwards/cmkx/Jeffries and Company sham as an example.
the shares he was issued were much later and they were preferred, not tradeable.
Who said they have to be tradeable? Jeez, you fart around until your stock in revoked and walk away with your short sale proceeds. Many people on this board keep insinuating the brokers did this themselves.
See any 13d filings for anyone still holding more than 5% of the O/S? No?
Or if they shorted and expected a huge block of shares at a later date to cover.
How many shares did Stew end up with after the "lawsuit expenses" Stew fronted?
That's a huge block he received.
Now, that's twice.
Can you go back and re-read what I wrote?
Art approached my business partner about maybe rolling one of our deals into this "shell".
How did you turn that into we work with stock deals?
lettin it slip that he and a partner r involved in stock deals???motive for his bitterness?perhaps
Seriously....
You too huh?
A fair ? wildbill...why would Art approach him...
if he did at all?
Did you re-read where I said Art approached my business partner about rolling one of our deals into this shell?
The only contact I personally had with Art was a couple of emails about the behavior of his "moderators".
Where does it say we own a shell? I was talking about this "shell"
Art approached my business partner about maybe rolling an oil deal into the shell.
Where does it say we own a shell? I was talking about this "shell"
Art approached my business partner about maybe rolling an oil deal into the shell.
Yes, Art knows my business partner, who also owns shares of this stock.
And even with your concerns back then (sytner) you still bought shares of BCIT...also interesting. Why did you decide to buy shares
Bought some shares because we knew Mario was shorting shells based upon his fraud with MLON. Saw this was a shell that he started to hype so we figured we could bust him one by merging one of our deals.
That first PR Tom put out right after the halt contains phrases that my business partner suggested to Tom in an email.
As for Sytner, we had no idea he was involved until after we bought a small block. I know several other BCIT shareholders here too. I also recognize a few of the pumpers from other fiascos.
ohbull..if the short here is real and not a result of Stew and his friends, this is a very simple fix. Megas needs to stop making repeated blunders though.
You mean Cline left?
Nah,
Because you'll still have the excuses to watch for. The occasional "this is a good thing".
Only a response needed to be filed.
See anything on PACER yet?
Here's your answer glazman..
Who got Tom into this mess to begin with, brought in Pino, ran a scam offshore bank, is being looked at for his role in stealing $20 Million from Sentinel, who has friends who dump shares from offshore in places like Switzerland and Panama?
Who is being very quiet right now?
Do you know what cracks me up half the time here? Art approached my business partner about maybe rolling an oil deal into the shell. After we researched Sytner, including speaking to the attorney suing him and his buddies, I have not a doubt that Stew and his friends caused the excess shares in the market.
Ask Megas why he keeps refusing to talk about Stewart's buddies.
Read what you wrote in the original post.
Huh? Ignoring facts that have gone unchallenged for 4 years, is not going to win you any fans
Posted by: mastaflash Date: Friday, October 16, 2009 6:55:06 PM
In reply to: Egor who wrote msg# 125665 Post # of 125729
Both you and SEC say I'm a shareholder of record. Sounds good to me. DTC won't like that at all. 1.2B shares 'owned' on an OS of 4M. All shareholders of record. How can that be?
Megas was not forced to do that...he forced it to happen by Jan. '06 by taking the known brokers involved to court in Dec. '05
Did he give those 240 Million plus shares because he felt like it?
He had to settle with JH Darby and Capital Growth. He could have refused, he could have sued both for damages.
Read the 8k Megas filed. They intervened against the company
I use the word "forced" because the settlement Megas agreed to was a hose job to Megas and the shareholders.
What NSS? And no, I am not being sarcastic.
Have the Transfer Agent declare a formal Failure to Deliver and then ask the S.E.C. why the Customer Protection Rule is not being enforced.
what are your credentials to make this claim exactly
Someone who runs a financial company that specializes in Bank Guarantees, Medium Term Notes, bonds, and credit enhancement securities.
Plus, it's common sense for anyone who understands the legal side of financial law.
Even Burns made mention of such an scenario asking why Megas has not sued the brokers.
Ask Attaway what happens when counterfeit certs enter the marketplace and how they are legally handled in terms of damages to a company.
Counterfeit shares are not "cleaned up" thru a buy-in. It's a civil issue ---
Tom could have made those brokers buy back those shares at the last known trade plus asked the court for additional punitive damages.
glazman...
by suspending the buy-in they were refusing to force the BROKERS that Pino sold the shares thru to clean up their mess.
Counterfeit shares are not "cleaned up" thru a buy-in. It's a civil issue between the company defrauded and the person(s) who committed the fraud. The suspension was done because at the time, brokerages needed to go back and figure out if they had counterfeit shares. It's the proper move to suspend buy-in rules when counterfeit shares are the cause of a trade imbalance.
those brokers were culpable, but that culpability was nullified by the suspension
That's rediculous. They are still culpable legally regardless of a buy-in suspension or not. It's the defrauded company's responsibility to seek legal remediation by those who harmed the company.
the proper fix, as (i believe it was) you pointed out earlier, was to force the brokers that Pino and Pammy used to buy back the counterfeits... and they should have gone after Pino themselves
Unfortunately, Megas, under a civil court agreement was forced to deliver guaranteed shares to those brokers in exchange for what worked out to a huge discount based upon the last trade of .0489 before the halt.
Tom could have made those brokers buy back those shares at the last known trade plus asked the court for additional punitive damages.
and they should have gone after Pino themselves.
Except they intervened and went after the company.
Capital Growth Financial, L.L.C. and JH Darbie & Co. intervened in the Civil Litigation (the "Intervenors") and alleged that the Company negligently hired the Defendants and negligently supervised their actions and activities.
Furthermore, the claims of the Intervenors against the Company were exchanged for the issuance of 25,025,000 shares of the Company's common stock to JH Darbie & Co. and 219,723,000 shares of the Company's common stock to Capital Growth Financial,L.L.C. for an aggregate sum of 244,748,000 common stock shares
No, I did not since you left that out of your original statement.
And you know for a fact that I meant in Aug '05
Posted by: mastaflash Date: Friday, October 16, 2009 6:55:06 PM
In reply to: Egor who wrote msg# 125665 Post # of 125690
Both you and SEC say I'm a shareholder of record. Sounds good to me. DTC won't like that at all. 1.2B shares 'owned' on an OS of 4M. All shareholders of record. How can that be?
Egor, it was not Megas who hired Pino. It was our little buddy Sytner, who mysteriously, is not very vocal for a guy who is supposedly going to make millions from a cover/settlement.
Megas learned that messing with Pino in the first place
thanks molson, interesting comments from Burns..
but it again became delinquent in its public filings after December 2007 and is currently delinquent. As a result, there is no current information available to prospective buyers of BCIT stock as to the company’s assets or operations, if any exist”.
Typical CYA stuff from the powers that be.....
global lock remains in effect because BCIT has no one is acting as the statutorily-required transfer agent in compliance with federal securities law.”
hmmmm...seen that point posted long before Empire was contracted with....
Moreover, DTCC has not processed BCIT’s June 2008 reverse stock split and name change, in part because the Financial Industry Regulatory Agency (“FINRA”) has not recognized that corporate action
Not recognized because it was not filed properly. Easy fix regardless of whether Megas completes it or abandons the R/S.
In a follow-up interview with DTCC personnel, they conveyed the same position regarding the failure to keep the filings up to date. This information has been forwarded to Mr. Megas for comment.
Gee...40 of my deleted posts said the same thing.
Pretty simple fix. Follow the rules...then demand why the same rules are not reciprocated.
Why do you not understand that those shares are issued? Big difference between the 4 million OS MF tried to claim in that post and what is known to be issued and outstanding..
why is it that you ignore the FINRA and NYSE order to suspend the buy-in? that happened BEFORE the settlement.
This is why I post mastaflash...
DTC won't like that at all. 1.2B shares 'owned' on an OS of 4M
You know for a fact that the official Outstanding shares is far more than 4 Million....yet you post this.
You know for a fact that Megas delivered two-hundred-million plus shares to Capital Growth and J.H. Darby.
The DTC could care less how many shareholders own how many shares. It's the brokerages who have to reconcile that number with the Transfer Agent....who to date, has never once officially claimed a failure to deliver in this stock.
lets see...250M PinoShares....in the system as real because the DTC said they were
Because Megas ended up delivering those shares to Capital Growth and JH Darby under a legal settlement agreement.
ohbull, tell you what.
I'll stick with my opinion and you can stick your opinion.
My guess is that if Megas tries to file a filing exemption, he will create another mess he will need to clean up.
It would be on PACER as a response to the S.E.C's filing.
No response yet.
The worst thing that can happen is charges against the CEO. Or maybe a group of shareholders who are so sick of the bumbling come in and force the issue.
How's those bonds looking over on CSHD?
No, I mean file charges against the CEO for knowingly filing a bogus exemption.
fat butt
ohbull, one problem.
The Securities and Exchange Commission hammers companies who knowingly try to file a bogus exemption.
In BCIT's case, Megas knows there are more than 300 shareholders of record based upon the information he received from the bogus lawsuit.
Urban Casavant made this same mistake.
Instead of looking for exemptions, all Megas has to do is file a request for an extension, show proof he is in the process of having his financials taken care of, and get these suckers filed as quickly as possible.
Don't compound a previous blunder with a new blunder.