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.
Hello.
I have invested heavily in RMDM.. I have more than 50 million shares of RMDM, because I believe in the potential INNOTREK and also of the Chinese economy. I think to accumulate more shares during the week. My question is: Is anyone buying 0.0001?. A purchase order to 0.0001 (tens of millions of shares) would be executed or completed successfully?
Interesting article. I think this article is the source of the extract selected by Breezin. This paper shows that dilution and "cellar boxing" will inevitably and causally linked. Could this happen with RMDM?
http://newcmkx.proboards.com/index.cgi?board=Answers&action=print&thread=5893
"Naked shorting into $0.0001, or, **Cellar Boxing**
There’s a form of the securities fraud known as naked short selling that is becoming very popular and lucrative to the Market Makers that practice it. It is known as “Cellar boxing” and it has to do with the fact that the NASD and the SEC had to arbitrarily set a minimum level at which a stock can trade. This level was set at $.0001 or one-one hundredth of a penny. This level is appropriately referred to as “the cellar”. This $.0001 level can be used as a "backstop" for all kinds of market maker and naked short selling manipulations.
“Cellar boxing” has been one of the security frauds du jour since 1999 when the market went to a “decimalization” basis. In the pre-decimalization days the minimum market spread for most stocks was set at 1/8th of a dollar and the market makers were guaranteed a healthy “spread”. Since decimalization came into effect, those one-eighth of a dollar spreads now are often only a penny as you can see in Microsoft’s quote throughout the day. Where did the unscrupulous MMs go to make up for all of this lost income? They headed "south" to the OTCBB and Pink Sheets where the protective effects from naked short selling like Rule 10-a, and NASD Rules 3350, 3360, and 3370 are nonexistent.
The unique aspect of needing an arbitrary “cellar” level is that the lowest possible incremental gain above this cellar level represents a 100% spread available to MMs making a market in these securities. When compared to the typical spread in Microsoft of perhaps four-tenths of 1%, this is pretty tempting territory. In fact, when the market is no bid to $.0001 offer there is theoretically an infinite spread.
In order to participate in “cellar boxing”, the MMs first need to pummel the price per share down to these levels. The lower they can force the share price, the larger are the percentage spreads to feed off of. This is easily done via garden variety naked short selling. In fact if the MM is large enough and has enough visibility of buy and sell orders as well as order flow, he can simultaneously be acting as the conduit for the sale of nonexistent shares through Canadian co-conspiring broker/dealers and their associates with his right hand at the same time that his left hand is naked short selling into every buy order that appears through its own proprietary accounts. The key here is to be a dominant enough of a MM to have visibility of these buy orders. This is referred to as "broker/dealer internalization" or naked short selling via "desking" which refers to the market makers trading desk. While the right hand is busy flooding the victim company's market with "counterfeit" shares that can be sold at any instant in time the left hand is nullifying any upward pressure in share price by neutralizing the demand for the securities. The net effect becomes no demonstrable demand for shares and a huge oversupply of shares which induces a downward spiral in share price.
In fact, until the "beefed up" version of Rule 3370 (Affirmative determination in writing of "borrowability" by settlement date) becomes effective, U.S. MMs have been "legally" processing naked short sale orders out of Canada and other offshore locations even though they and the clearing firms involved knew by history that these shares were in no way going to be delivered. The question that then begs to be asked is how "the system" can allow these obviously bogus sell orders to clear and settle. To find the answer to this one need look no further than to Addendum "C" to the Rules and Regulations of the NSCC subdivision of the DTCC. This gaping loophole allows the DTCC, which is basically the 11,000 b/ds and banks that we refer to as "Wall Street”, to borrow shares from those investors naive enough to hold these shares in "street name" at their brokerage firm. This amounts to about 95% of us. Theoretically, this “borrow” was designed to allow trades to clear and settle that involved LEGITIMATE 1 OR 2 DAY delays in delivery. This "borrow" is done unbeknownst to the investor that purchased the shares in question and amounts to probably the largest "conflict of interest" known to mankind. The question becomes would these investors knowingly loan, without compensation, their shares to those whose intent is to bankrupt their investment if they knew that the loan process was the key mechanism needed for the naked short sellers to effect their goal? Another question that arises is should the investor's b/d who just earned a commission and therefore owes its client a fiduciary duty of care, be acting as the intermediary in this loan process keeping in mind that this b/d is being paid the cash value of the shares being loaned as a means of collateralizing the loan, all unbeknownst to his client the purchaser.
An interesting phenomenon occurs at these "cellar" levels. Since NASD Rule 3370 allows MMs to legally naked short sell into markets characterized by a plethora of buy orders at a time when few sell orders are in existence, a MM can theoretically "legally" sit at the $.0001 level and sell nonexistent shares all day long because at no bid and $.0001 ask there is obviously a huge disparity between buy orders and sell orders. What tends to happen is that every time the share price tries to get off of the cellar floor and onto the first step of the stairway at $.0001 there is somebody there to step on the hands of the victim corporation's market.
Once a given micro cap corporation is “boxed in the cellar” it doesn’t have a whole lot of options to climb its way out of the cellar. One obvious option would be for it to reverse split its way out of the cellar but history has shown that these are counter-productive as the market capitalization typically gets hammered and the post split share price level starts heading back to its original pre-split level.
Another option would be to organize a sustained buying effort and muscle your way out of the cellar but typically there will, as if by magic, be a naked short sell order there to meet each and every buy order. Sometimes the shareholder base can muster up enough buying pressure to put the market at $.0001 bid and $.0002 offer for a limited amount of time. Later the market makers will typically pound the $.0001 bids with a blitzkrieg of selling to wipe out all of the bids and the market goes back to no bid and $.0001 offer. When the weak-kneed shareholders see this a few times they usually make up their mind to sell their shares the next time that a $.0001 bid appears and to get the heck out of Dodge. This phenomenon is referred to as “shaking the tree” for weak-kneed investors and it is very effective.
more ...look below please..
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Re: What is cellar boxing?
Post by fastwalker on Sept 24, 2004, 12:34am
continued....
At times the market will go to $.0001 bid and $.0003 offer. This sets up a juicy 200% spread for the MMs and tends to dissuade any buyers from reaching up to the "lofty" level of $.0003. If a $.0002 bid should appear from a MM not "playing ball" with the unscrupulous MMs, it will be hit so quickly that Level 2 will never reveal the existence of the bid. The $.0001 bid at $.0003 offer market sets up a "stalemate" wherein market makers can leisurely enjoy the huge spreads while the victim company slowly dilutes itself to death by paying the monthly bills with "real" shares sold at incredibly low levels. Since all of these development-stage corporations have to pay their monthly bills, time becomes on the side of the naked short sellers.
At times it almost seems that the unscrupulous market makers are not actively trying to kill the victim corporation but instead want to milk the situation for as long of a period of time as possible and let the corporation die a slow death by dilution. The reality is that it is extremely easy to strip away 99% of a victim company’s share price or market cap and to keep the victim corporation “boxed“ in the cellar, but it really is difficult to kill a corporation especially after management and the shareholder base have figured out the game that is being played at their expense.
As the weeks and months go by the market makers make a fortune with these huge percentage spreads but the net aggregate naked short positions become astronomical from all of this activity. This leads to some apprehension amongst the co-conspiring MMs. The predicament they find themselves in is that they can’t even stop naked short selling into every buy order that appears because if they do the share price will gap and this will put tremendous pressures on net capital reserves for the MMs and margin maintenance requirements for the co-conspiring hedge funds and others operating out of the more than 13,000 naked short selling margin accounts set up in Canada. And of course covering the naked short position is out of the question since they can’t even stop the day-to-day naked short selling in the first place and you can't be covering at the same time you continue to naked short sell.
What typically happens in these situations is that the victim company has to massively dilute its share structure from the constant paying of the monthly burn rate with money received from the selling of “real” shares at artificially low levels. Then the goal of the naked short sellers is to point out to the investors, usually via paid “Internet bashers”, that with the, let’s say, 50 billion shares currently issued and outstanding, that this lousy company is not worth the $5 million market cap it is trading at, especially if it is just a shell company whose primary business plan was wiped out by the naked short sellers’ tortuous interference earlier on.
The truth of the matter is that the single biggest asset of these victim companies often becomes the astronomically large aggregate naked short position that has accumulated throughout the initial “bear raid” and also during the “cellar boxing” phase. The goal of the victim company now becomes to avoid the 3 main goals of the naked short sellers, namely: bankruptcy, a reverse split, or the forced signing of a death spiral convertible debenture out of desperation. As long as the victim company can continue to pay the monthly burn rate, then the game plan becomes to make some of the strategic moves that hundreds of victim companies have been forced into doing which includes name changes, CUSIP # changes, cancel/reissue procedures, dividend distributions, amending of by-laws and Articles of Corporation, etc. Nevada domiciled companies usually cancel all of their shares in the system, both real and fake, and force shareholders and their b/ds to PROVE the ownership of the old “real” shares before they get a new “real” share. Many also file their civil suits at this time also. This indirect forcing of hundreds of U.S. micro cap corporations to go through all of these extraneous hoops and hurdles as a means to survive, whether it be due to regulatory apathy or lack of resources, is probably one of the biggest black eyes the U.S. financial systems have ever sustained. In a perfect world it would be the regulators that periodically audit the “C” and “D” sub-accounts at the DTCC, the proprietary accounts of the MMs, clearing firms, and Canadian b/ds, and force the buy-in of counterfeit shares, many of which are hiding behind altered CUSIP #s, that are detected above the Rule 11830 guidelines for allowable “failed deliveries” of one half of 1% of the shares issued. U.S. micro cap corporations should not have to periodically “purge” their share structure of counterfeit electronic book entries but if the regulators will not do it then management has a fiduciary duty to do it.
A lot of management teams become overwhelmed with grief and guilt in regards to the huge increase in the number of shares issued and outstanding that have accumulated during their “watch”. The truth however is that as long as management made the proper corporate governance moves throughout this ordeal then a huge number of resultant shares issued and outstanding is unavoidable and often indicative of an astronomically high naked short position and is nothing to be ashamed of. These massive naked short positions need to be looked upon as huge assets that need to be developed. Hopefully the regulators will come to grips with the reality of naked short selling and tactics like "Cellar boxing" and quickly address this fraud that has decimated thousands of U.S. micro cap corporations and the tens of millions of U.S. investors therein."
Innotrek traffic management in China, won the main contract
...Entertainment Group (RMDM) and its Chinese subsidiary Innotrek has announced Innotrek has signed a contract will be through the implementation of its traffic management technology to China, Taiyuan Qingxu County into a "Smart City." ????????????(?160???) Contract value of RMB 11 million (about 1.6 million U.S. dollars)
http://article.yeeyan.org/view/162770/118550
http://translate.google.com/translate?js=y&prev=_t&hl=es&ie=UTF-8&layout=1&eotf=1&u=http%3A%2F%2Farticle.yeeyan.org%2Fview%2F162770%2F118550&sl=zh-CN&tl=en
http://pro.yeeyan.org/trafficinfo-tech
http://translate.google.com/translate?js=y&prev=_t&hl=es&ie=UTF-8&layout=1&eotf=1&u=http%3A%2F%2Fpro.yeeyan.org%2Ftrafficinfo-tech&sl=zh-CN&tl=en
http://search.china.alibaba.com/selloffer/c-1033962_pageSize-30_n-y.html
My bet is as follows (also something I said earlier) with the financial results of RMDM next will come the news of mergers. It will be a chain reaction, explosive. I think being inside for the day that happens ...
I've said this many times: Hengfeng, with participation of the Chinese State (almost 4% of the state capital) has enormous potential. In a communist system, those who are protected by political power and bureaucracy, are certainly the winners ...And China will become a world economic leader. In China there is no crisis. Europe is eclipsed, China shines. RMDM will discover amazing secrets and highly enjoyable for its shareholders.
I firmly believe in the words of Mr. Morris. There are shareholders who bought in 0001 and now sell many, many, millions of shares. Are shareholders. I am calm. Also I have many millions of shares. LCRE GOOOOO
That's not bad. It's good if there is a long-term perspective.
Do you imagine the smart strategy RMDM-Innotrek?: News of merger with an American company. When your name is public, Americans can reliably check if that company is a real company. As many know it is a real company, will raise the pps of RMDM. Then will come the news of the merger with Loadcom. And, sooner or later, the brilliant RMDM quarterly report. Goal achieved: if the first news is solid, the following news will be much more believable. And the pps of RMDM fly to the sky ...
I thank the members of this forum the excellent research they share with us. I read all the posts from long ago. I have not participated so far. I have a different price actions from 0.0002 to 0.0018, but I stay within LCRE even in the worst moments. I've never sold a single action LCRE. I only buy stocks, go for long.
Hello to all investors in iHub LCRE. LCRE I have known through a friend, since January 2010. For several months I have bought shares LCRE. In the list of investors, I am Fortunatus. These days I have bought more shares. Currently, I have 34,645,550. I need to add to the list 1745550 shares, as I noted earlier 32.9 million. I tried adding (June 3) that number, but there were problems. Can anyone put here a link to the list?. Thanks.
By the way, from the beginning, I bet long and hard for LCRE. I keep my shares for indefinitely long time.
The Chinese writing says: Beijing Hengfeng Keji Hui Tong Keji. And below, in English: Beijing Innotrek Technology
Excellent DD and excellent response, Breezin. Thank you. Do you agree with me on the next point: Hengfeng has a wealth greater than it appears RMDM financial reports?. Hengfeng I think you will discover the wonderful secrets and amazing little by little to many investors.
Hello, Triehle. I think we all like to know the degree of commitment of Hengfeng with RMDM . Personally, I think the pps of RMDM would be higher, if there is more clarity on the relationship Hengfeng wants with RMDM. I hope the results of the 2Q: I foresee that those results will be higher than the current (actual results, compared with the results of 2009 are very good). And I believe that, together, to communicate the expected details of the mergers of RMDM. That would cause a chain reaction ...
No, I leave the question posed. A rhetorical question. Obviously, Hengfeng, who probably is very rich (if not more so now, tomorrow will be much richer) is interested in RMDM to make money. I guess this company does not want the current price of the shares, he wants a much higher price. I suspect that Hengfeng not say everything important she is, because it has an ace up his sleeve ... Secondly, the small state-owned, collaboration with development of the socialist field ... that is very illustrative: the Chinese State protects Hengfeng. IMO. Third, the movements and strategies of a Chinese company will hardly be predictable for the mentality of Western people. It will be very pragmatic and very, very cleverly planned
China has 4000 years giving lessons to the world. Some European countries, only a few centuries. China was great at the time of the Roman Empire. And it's still big now ... Great wisdom ...
Hengfeng has participation of the Chinese State. (State-owned (%) 3.85%)
Hengfeng collaborates with Chinese government policy (ie, Social Benefits In the Socialist new countryside construction, the hardware platform for the construction of rural information play a role.)
Hengfeng has a mark (innotrek) which is based in China. This brand is a subsidiary of RMDM.
RMDM reporting incomes are much lower than the income (not reported) from Hengfeng.
China is the oldest culture, wise, prudent and mysterious. The Chinese, wisely, patiently, quietly, get their success. His diligence and pragmatism surprised the West. (This is a historical fact)
Why is a subsidiary of RMDM Innotrek? What do you hope to achieve Hengfeng: win or lose, be predictable or surprise?. I raise these questions reflect the former premises
This is an official Chinese document. It's just one of many businesses Hengfeng. It shows that the wealth of Hengfen are much higher than the meager earnings of RMDM:http://www.bjpc.gov.cn/gwzjly_1/xywzxm/xywz09/skwxm09/200909/t457474.htm
Beijing Municipal Commission of Development and Reform
Rural Broadband Access Systems Project
September 4, 2009
Enterprise basic information
Company Name Beijing Hengfeng Hui Tong Technology Co., Ltd.
Registered Address Haidian District, Beijing Information Road,2No. Pioneer ParkDDong406Room
Registered Capital 520RMB
State-owned(%) 3.85%
Which foreign investment(%) 0%
Legal representative Wang Yuenong
Forms of organization Limited liability
Business Scope Laws and regulations allowed.
Total assets 497Million
Net assets 406Million
Project case
Projects, the scale briefly
Rural broadband access system to operators, sales, for the rural and underdeveloped regions of a fixed broadband access products. Cost-effective. Project investment scale1200Million yuan.
Market prospects, Benefit analysis
National ownership8Billion people of the rural broadband market; year1Million or more sales1More than 10 million yuan profit. Africa still lagging behind neighboring countries and regional markets.
Current progress
Already have mature, proven products; ongoing marketing efforts.
Project Industry Electronic information
Project Overview
Project Name Rural Broadband Access System
Construction site Beijing
Beginning and end of project construction period 2003Years11Months to2023Years11Month
Time is expected to reach production 2009Years3Month
2008Program Progress Have already reached capacity. In product marketing sales.
Construction content and scaleConstruction Content: the promotion of electronic products; Construction scale: Investment1200Million yuan; annual sales1Billion.
Currently the project has been equipped (planning, land, environmental protection, patent, pharmaceutical and other departments views) Project is no such requirement.
Project financing
The total investment1200Million
Intended mode of cooperation Joint venture
Intended to attract foreign investment500Million
Total investment (%) 40%Of the registered capital (%) 20%
Foreign requests for cooperation Know the best of the telecommunication market.
Benefit analysis
Sales Per year 1 Billion $?????
Payback period<2Years
Social benefits In the new socialist countryside construction, the hardware platform for the construction of rural information play a role.
Project Risk AnalysisMarketing sales ability is a key to the success of the project. If anything, the risk is that one.
Contact: Wang Yuenong Tel:010-82894245
Fax: E-mail:wynn@2911.net
Address and Zip Code:100085, Haidian District, Beijing Information Road,2NumberDDong406Room
A website that attaches to Hengfeng business: Hengfeng Hui Tong Keji. And does not require temporary circumstances, neither the beginning nor-year or year of completion. Logically, an ambiguous and confusing topic. It may be true or false, may even be a story before the merger is complete.
Chinese Ban Innotrek- Hengfeng, about foreign trade.
http://translate.google.es/translate?js=y&prev=_t&hl=es&ie=UTF-8&layout=1&eotf=1&u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.bizteller.cn%2Ftrade%2FcorpReport%2FcorpInfo%2FFE5B769ED0D05C9587A8F3E80F0BE90C6FCD78C52119042C66A74AA91FDF1396192FFB80F5A1B0BDC113D223CE8FF66619D48CA91D0107D5E1ACF31EA12A44EC2E24E7745A585361CEB60CFE726E2BEC.html&sl=zh-CN&tl=en
" this is seperate issue that still has not been fully explained or documented by RMDM. we dont know if they are one in the same, legally its appears that they are not"
This is not separate issue, logically. Then: where, when RMDM has said Innotrek or RMDM traded with Korea?. On the web innotrek.com talk of a trade made by Hui Tong, from Chinese soil. That business may even have ceased long ago, but business was Hengfeng, not RMDM
1) Are you good enough to place here the explicit statement of RMDM, that RMDM says do business with NK?
2) Beijing Hengfeng HuiTong Keji is the same legal person Innotrek?. Because RMDM only mentions Innotrek, but you said that RMDM never mentions Hengfeng ...
Fire Lane: Are you good enough to place here RMDM this explicit statement?
FireLane: "Innotrek is or is not exactly what Hengfeng Hui Tong?. Chinese texts refer to Hui Tong. So now you say they are separate legal entities. Perhaps now you've changed your mind?
Fire Lane: "Innotrek is or is not exactly what Hengfeng Hui Tong?. Chinese texts refer to Hui Tong. So now you say they are separate legal entities. Perhaps now you've changed your mind?
If they are separate legal persons, no problem with the issue of KN. Hengfeng not innotrek. Innotrek states (in USA) about activities other than activities Hengfeng.
If they are identical legal. Then Innotrek is very, very, very rich, and will be immensely richer with so many collaborations with the Chinese government. In that case, China may be very interested in Hengfeng, because it is a high technology company communications, national interest to China (a centralized political system or state). In that case, the Chinese government will protect the interests of Hengfeng and that gives prospects are extremely wealthy. But in that case, too, Hengfeng is currently under trade restrictions imposed by the Chinese government
First: The statements about the trade refer to Hengfeng Hui Tong (Read the texts written in Chinese!). Firelane think Hengfeng Hui Tong not is innotrek . Therefore, the allegations made against RMDM may be unfounded.
Second: Innotrek has received a ban on foreign trade. This prohibition by the Chinese government. If Hengfeng Hui Tong makes real sales in China, then what is the evidence of actual exports made by Hui Tong Hengfeng?. I think any test.
Third: A written statement is not direct evidence of any actual fact. A text may refer to a past event, before the merger with RMDM. A text may also be a statement of purpose past. A text may be a fabrication to make it appear more important than the actual ... An individual "X" could write that it "Y" now: this is not absolute evidence that it is true. Maybe "Y" has happened twenty years ago, so "Y" does not currently exist, or may be "Y" did not happen ever, but the individual "X" wrote that it "Y" then the individual would be writing a lie or an exaggeration ...
Finally, the hypothetical fact(very hypothetical facts) refer to hypothetical physical activities developed in the lands of East Asia (issue separate from legal issues in the U.S.). Only the Chinese government can control and access enough about these hypothetical facts. If it is not clear whether Hui Tong is legally the same as Innotrek, then: How to know if anyone has traded with KN really from China.? How to know who has been: Hui Tong and Innotrek (or is that Innotrek = Hengfeng, but Hengfen is richer, much richer than the poverty of financial results Innotrek states in USA)? How to know when and for how long: in the past but not now, or even now? How do you know who wrote the text was negligent, true, false, fanciful, trickster .... (That is difficult to establish logical and empirically)?. Or maybe you feel that you have to believe absolutely everything that people say and write?
Grey, I am an investor in RMDM, you mate and great admirer of you. Always, thanks. I value their opinions and intelligence.
A View from Europe: European countries economy is scraping the abyss, the euro fell against the dollar (this does not benefit American exports to Europe), the project of European unity is in serious and fatal danger of death, Germany ( the European locomotive) shakes because it will be difficult to sustain countries that squander money ... Faced with this bleak picture for Europe, Asia (China in the first line) may be part of the world with a greater potential for economic growth. Europe is in decline. That's not good for the First World. But it can be a great opportunity for the role will represent China in the near future. Is painful for me, as a European, but may be the truth.IMO
To request information about the possibility or impossibility of exports by Innotrek: check or ask at these sites the Chinese government ( international commerce):
http://www.customs.gov.cn/publish/portal0/
http://english.ccpit.org/
I have not been able to find references to innotrek in these web . Perhaps because the Chinese government probably does not know (not allow) any foreign trade activity made by Innotrek? ... A hypothetical question probably ...
Thanks. Gentlemen, copy the Chinese text of the ban to Innotrek; search baidu.com, or another Chinese search engine. Probably several links appear: those links confirm the government ban. IMO.
Analyze the following: Hypothesis: Perhaps by 2008, Hengfeng (in Chinese) - Innotrek (English), had any export permit, but later, the Management Authority of China denied that permission. View and compare these links, one is valid until the summer of 2008, the second link, it seems now is the current year.
FIRST LINK 2008:
http://translate.google.com/translate?hl=es&sl=zh-CN&tl=en&u=http%3A%2F%2Fdbpub.cnki.net%2Fgrid2008%2Funis%2FDetail.aspx%3FdbName%3DSNAD%26FileName%3DSNAD000001275378
(Chinese) http://dbpub.cnki.net/grid2008/unis/Detail.aspx?dbName=SNAD&FileName=SNAD000001275378
SECOND LINK 2010:
http://hengfenghuitong.cn.alibaba.com/athena/bizreflist/hengfenghuitong.html
(Chinese)http://hengfenghuitong.cn.alibaba.com/athena/bizreflist/hengfenghuitong.html
Text of second link ( I'm going to put the Chinese text, but it is not possible in iHub): "Self-and agent import and export of various commodities and technologies, but the state to limit or prohibit the import and export of goods and technology with the exception; laws and administrative regulations, the State Council decided to ban, and may not operate; laws and administrative regulations, the State Council shall decide authorized by the approving authority approved by the administrative department for industry and commerce registration before they can operate; laws and administrative regulations, the provisions of the State Council decided not permitted, to choose to carry out business activities and management projects. Intellectual Property Investment 1.5 million yuan."
If true the hypothesis that the Chinese bureaucracy limits the export to this Chinese company, then: is there reason to believe that this company technology products exported from the Chinese territory?. In a system similar to the Chinese system, a transgression of this prohibition is virtually impossible, IMO. More difficult if the company collaborates in strategic government projects ... IMO
Sorry, correction: I think" Wang "is probably a name generational or surname. It is therefore likely to be the family name. "Wynn", "Wei", etc.: If treatment is "Mr. Wang", then "Wang" is a surname. If treatment is "Mr. Wynn," then "Wynn" s surname. The proper name - according to the previous text, is not published in financial or business documents
"As in most Asian countries, Chinese names are composed of surname, name and name generation. For example, in the name Li Paio Hui, Li is the surname,Paio ist name generational and Hui ist proper name. The Call them by name, preceded by Mr. or Mrs. In a business context, names not be used. "
This text is a translation of an official text of a European Public Administration. I have the official document. It is a public document that is on the Internet.
I think" Wang "is probably a name generational or surname. It is therefore likely to be the family name. "Wynn", "Wei", etc.: If treatment is "Mr. Wang", then "Wang" is a surname. If treatment is "Mr. Wynn," then "Wynn" s last name. The proper name - according to the previous text, is not published in financial or business documents.
"In Hong Kong and other coastal cities has been a Westernization of the names. Initials are used, or even English names. For example, Wu Chang Jiang can be called " Chang Walter " or put in their cards Chang WJ."
Wynn ? = Wei? .
Maybe, probably, can be an English version of a Chinese name? ( I know nothing about the pronunciation of the English language.)
Sorry: Tao Cheng is a member of RMDM and a member of Hengfeng Huitong, along with Wang Yuenong. It's something verifiable.
Tao Chang is a member of RMDM and a member of Hengfeng Huitong, along with Wang Yuenong. It's something verifiable.
Wanted to say: Did I interpret this correctly or not?
I have this wrong: "" I interpret correctamete or not? ". I correct expression.
Humbly believe that it is very difficult to get to know the full extent, the whole truth about the Chinese company. I think that exceeds our capacity and our media. We RMDM investors, we require Innotrek to declare the whole truth and nothing but the truth, unconditionally, for Truth and for the good of everyone. For the good of the whole world must be the truth. Personally, I love the truth above money.
I can be wrong. Translations of Chinese texts are difficult to understand. But I think the text says that the Chinese state restricted, prohibited or denies imports Hengfeng (under the Chinese name - top, left-appears INNOTREK). The text reads:" the state to limit or prohibit the import and export " "I interpret correctamete or not?
Self-and agent import and export of various commodities and technologies, but the state to limit or prohibit the import and export of goods and technology with the exception; laws and administrative regulations, the State Council decided to ban, and may not operate; laws and administrative regulations, the State Council shall decide authorized by the approving authority approved and registered by the administration for industry only after operation; laws and administrative regulations, the provisions of State Council decided to not leave, choose to carry out business activities and management projects. Intellectual Property Investment 1.5 million yuan.
See this: Hengfeng new link in "alibaba". Under the Chinese name (Beijing Hengfeng Huitong Keji), appears: INNOTREK. See the following text about imports and exports:
"Self-and agent import and export of various commodities and technologies, but the state to limit or prohibit the import and export of goods and technology with the exception; laws and administrative regulations, the State Council decided to ban, and may not operate; laws and administrative regulations, the State Council shall decide authorized by the approving authority approved by the administrative department for industry and commerce registration before they can operate; laws and administrative regulations, the provisions of the State Council decided not permitted, to choose to carry out business activities and management projects. ??????150??? Intellectual Property Investment 1.5 million yuan." This text appears on several sites on Innotrek or Hengfeng.
I fixed the links in Chinese and translated I place the links.
http://hengfenghuitong.cn.alibaba.com/athena/contact/hengfenghuitong.html
http://hengfenghuitong.cn.alibaba.com/athena/bizreflist/hengfenghuitong.html
http://translate.google.es/translate?hl=es&sl=zh-CN&tl=en&u=http%3A%2F%2Fhengfenghuitong.cn.alibaba.com%2Fathena%2Fcontact%2Fhengfenghuitong.html
http://translate.google.es/translate?js=y&prev=_t&hl=es&ie=UTF-8&layout=1&eotf=1&u=http%3A%2F%2Fhengfenghuitong.cn.alibaba.com%2Fathena%2Fbizreflist%2Fhengfenghuitong.html&sl=zh-CN&tl=en
I think Hengfeng must communicate openly and how it relates to Innotrek: whether or not the same company. I think Hengfeng should explain publicly why it appears on the website of innotrek.com. IMO
Or just have updated old information. Information that was not updated by carelessness or negligence. There may be a thousand reasons. It is the old text innotrek.com web ... You can even happen, it was an insignificant sentence is amended and earlier (probably) to the commercial limitations imposed by the Chinese authorities to Innotrek. http://translate.google.es/translate?js=y&prev=_t&hl=es&ie=UTF-8&layout=1&eotf=1&u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.bizteller.cn%2Ftrade%2FcorpReport%2FcorpInfo%2FFE5B769ED0D05C9587A8F3E80F0BE90C6FCD78C52119042C66A74AA91FDF1396192FFB80F5A1B0BDC113D223CE8FF66619D48CA91D0107D5E1ACF31EA12A44EC2E24E7745A585361CEB60CFE726E2BEC.html&sl=zh-CN&tl=en
It seems that North Korea is a small country. People are starving. The Korean Communist government is cruel, overbearing and ridiculous. The most frightening is not that government ameza for the world: the most terrible is the absolute poverty of Koreans who take to the streets to collect and boil some herbs and roots. But I have no logical necessity to believe that Innotrek Korea currently traded. I admit the possibility that Innotrek not trade with this country ...
Contemplating this possibility: What Innotrek think you can do if you receive a charge is false?. And if you think Innotrek have received serious damage because these accusations?...Not only economic damage, but damage to public image internationally ..
And the facts you report are hypothetical operations (hypothetical, very hypothetical) that could only take place in China, not USA. Saying something just hypothetically ....
Well, well. If any two companies are sharing the same web. Hengfeng might have traded with Korea (maybe not longer) and yet, Innotrek have no relationship with Korea. What do you say now? .
Who provides physical evidence, real? Only China. Did you expect that China supply such evidence?. I believe that China exports to Innotrek restricted. I have put a link. Now, you have to know how long the ban was Innotrek. And I think that a Chinese company can not evade the Chinese government.
Explain the following: how is it possible that the same is true and not worth to try something?. The website which provides information on external trade of Innotrek is the web says Hengfeng is Innotrek.