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 had a theory about that for a long time and I posted it about a year ago. Then we seemed to be making some moves and I thought I was wrong. Basically it is this, I think the management bids 1's all the time eventually people who bought in on the pump at 2 or 3 sell and go somewhere else. The management then waits for the next pump and sells into it for 2 or 3 all this without dilution. I am now convinced this is the scheme and it works, next pump I am out.
Yes Oilin it was your confidence that convinced me stay in when we had that failure to launch a couple of months ago. I always thought this one had potential but as you know if you read y post I thought it was just a money printer for CS. Anyway thanks I am really glad I didn't sell and it was in no small part to you.
I said Charles S wasn't diluting and that is bad because my theory is right. He is sitting on several hundred million shares when the stock is pumped he sells at 2 or 3 and he has bids in for half a billion shares at 1. So when people buy in at 2 they wait a while realize the pump is over and they get out at a loss. He has doubled his money and just vacuums up the now unwanted shares at 1's. He has bought about 100 million in the last 2 weeks. Let's be clear I still have my shares and I will see what happens during the next pump which should be in about six months. Maybe CS will have a change of heart and make this thing fly, it does have that potential.
That what the play here is; the hundreds of millions bid at 0001 are CS. He sells into the hype at 2 or 3 and waits for people to say F55k it I 'll take a loss and make it back up. That is why ( i believe) there is no dilution he sells his shares in the pump and buys them back after the pumps dies down. JMHO
If your right and it is dilution then that may be a good thing the mgmt may be setting this up. I may be overly pessimistic, anyway I am stuck for now but the next pump if it doesn't get a price rise I am gone. Nothing more to say. Just wait and see.
The 200 Million ask is the key. I don't think they are diluting simply CS has a large pool of shares he sells to anyone bidding higher that 0001 and waits. Sooner or late the people who bought at 0002 or higher get tired take the hit and sell into his bid for 0001. So on a couple of hundred million shares he makes .0001 or I would guess $80K each surge. You won't make a fortune but a reasonable income and there is no risk or dilution. That is the beauty of it. Wash, Rinse, Repeat.
I hope I am wrong and you are right, time will tell.
That is the beauty and the tragedy of it. It can stay like this forever (or for many years) making the owner an income of say 80 - 120 K a year. To make a real go of it would require Blood, Sweat and Tears with no guarantee but it could be huge. It just looks like CS has decided on the easy sure thing with the yearly income. If it gets sold to someone with different ideas then maybe it can go somewhere. I wait for his next pump (probably in 6 to 12 months) and I am gone.
I’ve seen a variation of what this may be used numerous times in penny mining stocks. A company owns a property that could potentially have an operating mine built on it. However, that would take time and sweat and some luck, instead these companies get investor interest pumped in the business by pumping the real potential of the mine, trading takes off and the company sells xxx shares which pays the owner a reasonable salary , say $150k but there no risk and no sweat. The beauty is you can redo every year so long as there is interest; and this company has a heck of a product. Not saying that what is happening, but it looks familiar.
Thanks!
OK Googled and it means "News Pending". Let's see.
What does/did the signal 911 mean?
Thanks makes sense.
Maybe someone can explain but when this thing traded 1 Billion shares last week and there was no price change wasn't that a warning. How can that happen? Are people here certain it isn't being diluted.
Well I doubt it. If that is what you suspect, best of luck.
All you can do is put them up for sale (at market) and wait. It may take years or they may never sell. You are basically selling to someone who mistakenly thinks the stock can come back. Kinda sad but true. Hope this helps.
yep, I don't trade pink's anymore. Still look in now and then, like I say hope people aren't counting on MGLG to come back, it is a zombie. GLTA.
Yes you do see zombie companies trading on the Greys. I read somewhere that the SEC allows people to trade stocks that are worthless since it is up to the people buying to do their homework. Anyhow, I hope those who still hold didn't lose the rent money. I lost 4 K on this in 2008 was my first buy in the Pinks.
The guy who ran the scam is Irwin Boock of Toronto although I believe he had a different name at birth. He owes 8 million but whether they ever get anything out of him I don't know. Below is a an article from a Canadian newspaper:
Judge orders Toronto billionaire’s ex-partners to pay millions
The Globe and Mail
Alex Shnaider says he pursued the lawsuit, rather than settle it quietly, in order to clear his name.
Fernando Morales/The Globe and Mail
Jeff Gray Toronto City Hall Reporter
Published March 7, 2014 Updated May 12, 2018
A group of Alex Shnaider's former business associates must hand over tens of millions of dollars for engaging in "fraudulent misrepresentation" and an "unlawful conspiracy" to lure the Toronto billionaire into investing about $50-million in a Russian oil joint venture, an Ontario Superior Court judge has ruled.
In an 166-page ruling issued late Friday afternoon, Justice Mary Anne Sanderson also completely rejects a list of sensational allegations made by Mr. Shnaider's former associates against the billionaire and his business partner, Eduard Shyfrin, that range from bribing Russian police to threats of kidnapping,
The judgment orders Michael Shtaif, a Calgary-based former Russian oil executive at the centre of the failed joint venture, to pay Mr. Shnaider's Midland Group $46.1-million (U.S.) plus interest, or $59.56-million. Gregory Roberts, a Toronto-area lawyer and businessman, must also pay $59.56-million.
Two other men involved in the matter, convicted Toronto fraudster Irwin Boock (also known as John Howard) and another man, Stanton De Freitas, have each been ordered to pay $8.27-million (U.S.). Another former friend of Mr. Shnaider's, Eugene Bokserman, must pay $1.5-million.
In a brief e-mail, Mr. Shtaif vowed to appeal: "Respectfully, I believe the case was wrongly and unfairly decided and I have retained counsel to appeal the decision."
Mr. Roberts, who represented himself at last year's trial, also said he will appeal the ruling.
"The judgment in my view amounts to an ambush," he said in an e-mail.
Mr. Roberts said he was denied a "fair opportunity" to counter some of the allegations on which the judge made findings as, he said, they were not relied upon by Mr. Shnaider's lawyers at the trial.
In a press release, Mr. Shnaider said that he pursued the lawsuit, rather than settle it quietly, in order to clear his name. The defendants had warned before the litigation began that they would make their allegations public, he said.
"Mr. Shyfrin and I were determined not to give in to threats," Mr. Shnaider said.
Friday's decision repeatedly rejects testimony provided by Mr. Shtaif. "I did not find him to be a credible witness," the ruling reads, saying that he "failed to answer questions directly," that his evidence was "often inconsistent" and that he failed to produce promised documents to back up his testimony.
The judge said she rejects Mr. Shtaif's testimony that he was forced to sign a loan agreement in a Russian police station after an officer drew his gun.
As for Mr. Roberts, Justice Sanderson said she found much of his evidence "unreliable."
She rules that he engaged in "deceit" and in a "breach of fiduciary duty" for failing to tell Mr. Shnaider that a man involved in the venture who called himself John Howard was actually Mr. Boock, who "had a criminal record and was using a false name to hide his criminal past."
At the centre of the case was the setting up of a joint venture to buy underdeveloped Russian oil fields in 2006. Mr. Shnaider had insisted that his planned $50-million investment would be contingent on another investor adding $70-million, the judge's ruling says.
Justice Sanderson ruled that Mr. Shtaif engaged in "fraudulent misrepresentation" for failing to tell Mr. Shnaider that a promised $8-million payment from the other investor had not materialized – a payment that was supposed to be the first installment of the $70-million investment, which was actually committed by a shell company controlled by Mr. Boock.
Yep a whole $19.00. Wow.
Yes, history is a great teacher. I lost some money on this about 3 years ago and just the other day decided to see if it was still ticking. Can't say I am surprised but a few months from now most won't remember and others will be touting the genius of Berlinger and his plan to make AV1 the next big MMJ company. Like I said: Wash, Rinse, Repeat.
Wow, 20,000 to 1 reverse split. Wash, Rinse, Repeat.
No idea, if the world was just he'd be in jail. I don't thnk the company we know as MGLG exists anymore just a defunct shell that the SEC can't closeout.
SEC target Boock loses appeal of massive U.S. fine
2015-08-17 12:17 ET - Street Wire
Also Street Wire (U-*SEC) U S Securities and Exchange Commission
by Mike Caswell
Toronto's Irwin Boock has lost his appeal of $16.8-million in sanctions he received for a corporate hijacking scheme. (All figures are in U.S. dollars.) In a decision handed down on Thursday, Aug. 13, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit has denied the appeal as being too late. Mr. Boock, who is representing himself in the case, missed filing deadlines, including a 60-day period to appeal a ruling handed down in 2012.
Thursday's judgment upholds penalties the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission won against Mr. Boock for a scheme in which he and others took over the identities of several inactive pink sheets companies. The group filed false paperwork that gave them control over the companies, and then sold the companies as shells, grossing millions, according to the SEC. The stocks produced from the scheme included a shell that became Paramount Gold and Silver Corp., a Toronto Stock Exchange listing, and another that became Surrey-based World Hockey Association Corp. (The SEC did not accuse either company of any wrongdoing.)
The case resulted in an initial $11.2-million judgment against Mr. Boock, followed by a $5.6-million order. Mr. Boock appealed both on March 26, 2015, but the appeal court has ruled that the filing came too late. He missed the 60-day deadline to appeal the the $11.2-million judgment by a substantial margin, as that penalty was handed down on Aug. 2, 2012. He also did not object in time to the $5.6-million sanction, which he received on Jan. 2, 2015, the appeal decision states.
It is not entirely clear what Mr. Boock's grounds for appeal would have been, as the matter was in the preliminary stages, but in previous court filings he claimed that he made a videotaped confession under duress. He said that he provided the confession during an interview that he attended in Toronto with an SEC lawyer. Around that time, his wife had been in the hospital, he had slept very little and he was suffering from the effects of medication he was taking for heart problems. As he saw it, the SEC's lawyer "could have had me admitting to murders in countries I had never been to if he so wanted."
In addition to denying Mr. Boock's appeal, the appeal court dismissed an appeal by one of his co-accused, a Toronto-area man named Jason Wong, for similar reasons. He had previously claimed in court filings that the case was a matter of mistaken identity. He said he knew nothing about the hijackings and contended that somebody else must have used his name. The judge that heard the case, Denise Cote, rejected his argument entirely. In an Aug. 25, 2011, decision she ruled that it was clear he participated in every step of the scheme, engaging in "deliberate fraudulent behaviour."
The case against the two men dates back to Sept. 29, 2009, when the SEC filed a civil complaint against them and others in the Southern District of New York. The SEC claimed that they participated in a four-year scheme, starting in November, 2003, that targeted inactive public companies trading on the pink sheets. They ran the scheme through Select American Transfer, a transfer agency that they operated, and for which Mr. Wong served as president.
The hijacking targets, as described by the SEC, were typically inactive companies that still traded, but lacked a current transfer agent or contact person. The men scanned the pink sheets website to locate such companies. Once they identified a target, they reactivated the company through the appropriate secretary of state using false names and addresses, the SEC said.
In some instances, they discovered that the secretary of state had declared a company void. When this happened, they simply incorporated a new entity with the same name and used it to assume the identity of the old company, the SEC claimed. They would then roll back the stock, change the company's name, and obtain a new Cusip number and trading symbol. Once the men had control of the companies, they sold them off as shells, fetching prices between $80,000 and $200,000 each, according to the complaint.
The other defendants were Stanton DeFreitas of Toronto and two Houston lawyers, Roger Shoss and Nicolette Loisel. The judge found Mr. DeFreitas and Mr. Shoss jointly liable with Mr. Boock for $8.2-million in gains. Ms. Loisel was ordered to pay $143,000 for aiding the scheme. (The SEC's case had to be completed in two parts because of a separate criminal trial against Mr. Shoss. In 2011 prosecutors in Florida charged him for an investment fraud and money laundering scheme. He ultimately received 18 months in jail.)
Throughout the case the SEC said little about the buyers of Mr. Boock's shells, but it did identify some of them. One was Quebec resident Jean-Francois Amyot. According to the SEC, he paid $1-million to buy 10 to 12 shells. The regulator did not accuse Mr. Amyot of any wrongdoing in the case, but it later filed civil charges against him for the pump-and-dump of an OTC Bulletin Board listing, Spencer Pharmaceuticals Inc. Mr. Amyot denied any wrongdoing, but failed to appear at his trial. The SEC is seeking up to $11-million in penalties by default.
© 2015 Canjex Publishing Ltd. All rights reserved.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The individual who hijacked this shell.
SEC target Boock files appeal
2015-06-30 12:11 ET - Street Wire
Also Street Wire (U-*SEC) U S Securities and Exchange Commission
by Mike Caswell
Irwin Boock, the Toronto man who incurred judgments totalling $16.8-million in the United States for a corporate hijacking scheme that dates back to 2003, has appealed his fines. (All figures are in U.S. dollars.) He has not yet stated his grounds of appeal, but he previously claimed that he made a videotaped confession under duress. He also said he was under the effects of heart medication when he made the confession.
The penalties stem from a scheme in which the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission claimed that Mr. Boock and others took over the identities of several inactive pink sheets companies. The group filed false paperwork that gave them control over the companies, and then sold them as shells, grossing millions, according to the SEC. The stocks produced from the scheme included a shell that became Paramount Gold and Silver Corp., a Toronto Stock Exchange listing. The case resulted in an initial $11.2-million judgment against Mr. Boock, followed by a $5.6-million order.
Throughout the case, Mr. Boock mostly denied any wrongdoing and complained about a videotaped confession the SEC obtained from him. He said that he provided the confession during an interview that he attended in Toronto with an SEC lawyer. He went to the meeting alone, without a lawyer. He also claimed that his wife had been in the hospital around the time of the interview and that he had slept very little. He further said that he was suffering from the effects of medication he was taking for heart problems. He claimed that the SEC's lawyer "could have had me admitting to murders in countries I had never been to if he so wanted."
Unfortunately for Mr. Boock, the judge was far from sympathetic to his situation. She found there was no doubt that he violated securities laws in a "knowing and intentional way." She also described his conduct as an egregious violation. In addition to the substantial financial penalties, the judge permanently banned him from penny stocks and from serving as an officer or director of a public company.
Mr. Boock is now seeking to have those penalties overturned. On March 26, 2015, he filed a notice of appeal. The notice only states his intention to appeal, and does not contain any details. Despite the lack of information, the SEC has already asked that the appeal be dismissed. In a motion filed on June 23, 2015, the regulator says the appeal came too late. The initial $11.2-million fine was handed down in 2012, and Mr. Boock had 60 days to appeal. His filing came well after that deadline, the SEC says.
The case against Mr. Boock dates back to Sept. 29, 2009, when the SEC filed a civil complaint against him and others in the Southern District of New York. The other defendants were Stanton DeFreitas of Toronto, Jason Wong of Markham, and two Houston lawyers, Roger Shoss and Nicolette Loisel. The regulator complained about a four-year scheme the men ran, starting in November, 2003, in which they hijacked the identities of inactive pink sheets companies. They typically sought stocks that still traded, but lacked a current transfer agent or contact person. Once they located a suitable target, they reactivated the company through the appropriate secretary of state, providing false names and addresses for contact information, the complaint stated.
With some of the companies, the men discovered that the secretary of state had declared a company void, the SEC said. When this happened, they incorporated a new entity with the same name and used it to assume the identity of the old company. They would then roll back the stock, change the company's name and obtain a new Cusip number, the SEC claimed. Once the men had control of the companies, they sold them off as shells, fetching prices between $80,000 and $200,000 each, according to the complaint.
The case never went to a trial, and the SEC won the initial $11.2-million decision on Aug. 2, 2012, followed by a later $5.6-million decision on Jan. 16, 2015. (The case had to be completed in two parts because of a separate criminal trial against Mr. Shoss. In 2011 prosecutors in Florida charged him for an investment fraud and money laundering scheme. He ultimately received 18 months in jail. The part of the SEC case that included Mr. Shoss, involving nearly half of the companies, was on hold until the completion of that criminal case.)
The SEC also won judgments against the two other Toronto-area defendants, Mr. DeFreitas and Mr. Wong. The judge found them jointly liable with Mr. Boock for disgorgement of $8.2-million in gains. She also permanently banned them from penny stocks. (Mr. Wong has since appealed as well.)
The hijacking case was not the first time the SEC pursued Mr. Boock. On Nov. 22, 2002, he agreed to pay $429,619 in disgorgement and penalties for the Leah Industries Inc. fraud. The SEC claimed that he disseminated news releases falsely claiming that PricewaterhouseCoopers had audited Leah's financial results, when it had not. He subsequently sold 540,000 shares, generating proceeds of $323,443.
Me too, too many other opportunities. Don't wait for something that will not happen.
If your right this reminds me of $PNG. It had product in stores and all the signs of a viable company but in the end it was a scam. The stock price went to about 0.70 if memory serves so this could go on for a while.
Reverse Split coming here. Then wash, rinse and repeat. Pathetic.
Sorry Folks, been watching from the sidelines and it looks like a RS and then, wherever. JMO
AGREE
Do you know how long the chill has been on?
I cannot buy this through Waterhouse. What are people using to buy as it is on the Chill list.
Thanks in advance
Well that is bad news and Mikey you called it. I am gone.
Another Fluff PR, she ain't goin anywhere. EOM.
Fluff PR. If AVOP wants to move will need more than this.
This is truly sad. Bryen Beglinner do somehthing!
I did some calc's and made a mistake. One Billion shares at .0001 is only $100K not 1 million I originally thought. So at best they made 3 or 4 Hundred Thousand with all the selling(at least that's my best guess). Doesn't seem worth it...maybe they really are using the cash to build the business. I guess only time will tell.
Hope that happens but doubt it. Seems more likely that they reverse split but I have shares and can't sell so I wait and see.
Yep Mikey you called it. Mr. Berlinger and company can live off the proceeds for a few years then resurrect another shell. That is the danger in Pinky land.
Looks like the dumping at 0.0001 has started.