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.
Will the consumer protection laws of the State of Nevada protect EIGH shareholders? Stay tuned. Go EIGH!!!
My one allowed post for the day!
Shareholder Statement - Board Meeting and Board Decisions June 3, 2011
Relating to the
Illegal Short Positions Believed Held in 8000 Inc. (EIGH.pk)
Summary: 8000 Inc. Evidenced Naked Short Concerns, Board Decisions and Actions
The Board of 8000 Inc. (hereafter, “EIGH” or the “Company) received and examined volunteered
shareholder brokerage account records, letters issued by the SEC and statements made specifically by
E*Trade in April 2011. That examination revealed, to the best of our analysis, that there is (by admission
and through verified shareholder records and subsequent share count previously submitted to the
regulators--and made available to the public) an illegal naked short position held within EIGH.pk, the
trading symbol of the company’s common. This situation, the Company believes, has defrauded the
Company and its shareholders and constitutes manipulation of the Company’s stock according to SEC
and/or FINRA rules. And critical to the fraud allegation is this simple fact: EIGH.pk is not eligible for
short sales (since it is not DTC-eligible—i.e., not transferable electronically). The consequence is that
EIGH shareholders who have purchased Company stock in cash and as confirmed by E*Trade on April 27,
2011 may or may not own legitimate EIGH stock and have, in our considered judgment, been defrauded
by E*Trade (or any other brokerage firm through whom shorted shares were bought)!
Very specifically, on April 25, 2011, E*Trade, through e-mail communications with Company
representatives admitted short positions held through failures to deliver and received and that they
would not address until requested to do so through the proposed share exchange announced for May
20, 2011. The subsequent communications between the shareholders of EIGH and the SEC and the
recent share count published again substantiates, in our opinion, both the Company’s belief of naked
short positions held in EIGH.pk and the May 3, 2011 admission of the SEC and not E*Trade.
In an effort to satisfy our fiduciary duty to our shareholders, the Company has tried a number of actions
(including seeking FNRA and SEC cooperation to have an exchange of common for voting preferred,
physical certificates required to qualify) to eliminate such illegal shorts. Since the Company’s requested
regulatory intervention has so far been ignored, the Board has resolved to proceed with the
replacement of outstanding share certificates, to bring the stock issuance into compliance with the law
and the number of shares lawfully and correctly issued by the Company. The Board will instruct the
Company’s Transfer Agent (the “TA”) to register all applications for replacement of all provable
legitimate EIGH.pk stock held within E*Trade brokerage accounts.
1 0 4 3 2 B a l l s F o r d R o a d S u i t e 3 0 0 M a n a s s a s V i r g i n i a 2 0 1 0 9
2
Decisions of the Meeting of the Board of Directors of 8000 Inc., a Nevada Corporation Formed July 21,
2007, Held on June 3, 2011.
a) Procedural Considerations
Having held a board meeting on June 3, 2011, through Tom Kelly, its sole Officer and Director, the EIGH
Board established that it had a quorum for the meeting which enabled it to make decisions, pursuant to
statutory requirements, as well as in conformity with EIGH’s corporate By-Laws.
The Board’s meeting was convened after receipt of the disclosures detailing the shareholder brokerage
account records and the activities and disclosures of E*Trade.
The Board concluded, based on evidence submitted by its consultant, Jonathan Bryant, including from
shareholders and brokerage firms, was that there was, in its judgment, significant and demonstrable
evidence that showed that unresolved and unaccounted naked short positions were held in EIGH.pk
stock.
Continuing its investigation of underlying circumstances, with Mr. Bryant’s leadership, the Board
believes it can demonstrate, through an empirical count of shares held by the shareholders of EIGH and
further confirmed through correspondence from the SEC (albeit in amounts believed to be significantly
undercounted) and with the brokerage firms themselves. Currently, E*Trade will be the focus of the
Company’s actions being the only brokerage to admit short positions held by them in EIGH.pk, but the
Company is now undertaking further examination of an additional 12 brokerage firms it is convinced
hold short positions.
The Board believes that these admissions of short positions unresolved are illegal under the applicable
SEC and FINRA rules and regulations relating to creating and maintaining a fair and orderly market as
defined by SEC Rules, the SEC’s mission statement and FINRA Rule 6490. EIGH notes that it has had no
support from the regulators (at least to this date), including denial of the requested FINRA common for
voting preferred exchange corporate action (deemed necessary to protect the interest of both the
shareholders and the Company by determining and correcting these improper stock positions), even
though we believe there are significant illegal short positions in stock of EIGH. The Company, in fact,
believes this situation has been on-going for several years and in its opinion is that the true figure of
shorts held is significantly greater than those declared through the Shareholder Statement dated May
31, 2011.
1 0 4 3 2 B a l l s F o r d R o a d S u i t e 3 0 0 M a n a s s a s V i r g i n i a 2 0 1 0 9
3
Board decisions resulting from June 3, 2011 Board Meeting.
§ 1) Board Decision (Upon Examination of Shareholder Brokerage Accounts)
The Board resolved to authorize its counsel, invoking Nevada state law, to compel correction of the
acknowledged “share imbalance” prior to the cancellation of shares held at or by E*Trade Brokerage by
June 27, 2011. The Board also authorized to place a stop on the stocks held in E*Trade accounts as a
measure to inhibit what it believes could be further “share imbalance” activities. Furthermore, as
E*Trade have admitted that they do not know who owns legitimate or illegitimate shares and that there
are short positions held within their accounts on behalf of their clients, under NRS 78.235, the
shareholder has rights to ownership of physical certificates, especially after paying for them through
their brokerage account. As E*trade, after requests, and the regulators have left the resolution of the
matter to the Company, the only realistic method for ascertaining legally the ownership of duly
purchased shares in EIGH.pk in E*Trade, knowing the facts, is to stop further transactions and to identify
which shareholder hold which shares and how many. Thus placing a stop on the shares is the only
feasible and workable method to protect the shareholders best interest knowing there is an illegal short
position held at E*Trade. The Board reiterated that it will do everything within its capability and reduced
finances to foreclose any person or entity’s ability to allow the corporation and its assets to be used for
illegal purposes or personal enrichment in violation of various laws, including the federal or state laws,
now or at any time in the future.
Specifically, pursuant to Nevada Revised Statutes for Governing Corporate Law and Corporate
Responsibility (see appendices below), NRS §78.250 provides, in relevant part, that if “…it becomes
desirable for any reason, in the discretion of the board of directors, to cancel any outstanding certificate
for shares and issue a new certificate therefore conforming to the rights of the holder, the board of
directors may …order any holders of outstanding certificates for shares to surrender and exchange them
for new certificates within a reasonable time to be fixed by the board of directors…” Given that E*Trade
and the SEC each acknowledge short positions held in EIGH, the Board has concluded it has authority
and should take action pursuant to NRS §78.250—based on EIGH’s count of shareholders brokerage
account holdings and the figures generated through the certified transfer agents reports. This exercise
will continue with a full examination of up to 13 brokerage firms identified which the Company believes
holds short positions who will under the same conditions have all stock held within their accounts
cancelled with immediate effect and the Company’s shareholders with accounts at these brokerage
firms again being asked to provide details and submit the Application Form described below and
attached. Details of these actions by the Company will follow the same process and shareholders will be
1 0 4 3 2 B a l l s F o r d R o a d S u i t e 3 0 0 M a n a s s a s V i r g i n i a 2 0 1 0 9
4
instructed accordingly moving forward. The applicability of NRS 78.250 is dealt within “NRS 78.015
Applicability of chapter” (See appendices).
The other issue before the Board related to whether certain stock sold to shareholders through E*Trade
were issued technically without the authorized capital being available, this being confirmed through
E*Trade’s statement of April 27, 2011 that “…[W]e are not able to determine who owns legitimate or
illegitimate shares…”. The Company reviewed and affirmed its conclusion on Nevada corporate law,
namely NRS 78.235 which provides that “every stockholder in a Nevada corporation is entitled to have a
certificate, signed by the officers or agents, certifying the number of shares in the corporation owned by
the stockholder” (see appendices for full text). As a result, E*Trade by its own admission holds an
oversold and over purchased short position in EIGH.pk or, more simply, holds illegal naked short
positions.
We believe the foregoing identified naked short positions are in violation of SEC and/or FINRA
requirements. In that context, the Company resolved to order the replacement of the outstanding
certificates for E*Trade through the cancellation of all shares they hold on 27, June, 2011. In the first
instance, all share held in E*Trade accounts will have a stop placed on them on Wednesday June 8,
2011. The Company will request physical delivery of the shares held in the street name at and on behalf
of E*Trade customers and shareholders of EIGH.pk to the TA. Upon receipt of the share certificates from
both E*Trade, and the requested documentation from the shareholders, itemized below, will be
cancelled or returned. In the event of a “share imbalance” (the evident code phrase of choice of these
shorting firms), the Company will provide all information to the regulators and authorities accordingly.
Shareholders who have shares held within E*Trade accounts should send the following as proof of
ownership together with the completed, attached Application Form directly to (i) 8000 Inc., Attn:
Thomas Kelly, President, 10432 Balls Ford Road, Suite 300, Manassas, Virginia 20109 or (ii) e-mail
directly scanned copies to enquiries@8000inc.net. The Application Forms require a shareholder to
submit the following (a) a copy of their account detailing the number of shares held in their E*Trade
account and (b) a signed approved application form attached below. These documents will be compiled
and sent to the TA.
Pursuant to provision of “reasonable time” under NRS §78.250, the Board has determined that the
documents should be received by the Company and or its transfer agent by 4pm EST June 20, 2011
being 14 days after the notification of the cancellation of the shares. The Company and TA will verify
that the applying shareholders have proper ownership rights to the stock memorialized by the account
1 0 4 3 2 B a l l s F o r d R o a d S u i t e 3 0 0 M a n a s s a s V i r g i n i a 2 0 1 0 9
5
details and Application Form submitted and will proceed with replacing the old certificate/stock with a
new certificate or certificates upon confirmation by the TA that the shares recorded by the shareholders
are correct, valid and legitimate as per the certified shareholder records. If, however, the shareholder
affirmations prove that there are more shares sold to and held by shareholders with E*Trade fiducially
as this would indicate fraud, the Company will pass on the information to the regulators and or law
enforcement agencies.
All verified share holders of legitimate shares of EIGH.pk purchased through and held in E*Trade
accounts will receive a new certificate for the same number, value and rights of shares as duly acquired
through E*Trade. If it is identified that more shares were sold by E*Trade as recorded in shareholder
accounts, this information will be made public and submitted as evidence to the regulators for action.
Upon receipt of the required documents from the shareholders, a count will be undertaken to establish
the true and accurate numbers of shares sold to investors by each individual brokerage firm. The total
number of shares proven by submission of the Application Form will be measured against the certified
shareholder list provided to the Company’s Transfer Agent, in turn provided to the Company.
Furthermore, the Board concluded that such replacement of the certificates serves the best interests of
the good faith shareholders, whose interest and voting rights which we believe were illegally diluted by
the trading firms in engaging in naked short selling of EIGH.pk.
A failure to file an Application Form for replacement will be treated by the Board as the presumption of
a holder’s not having paid for the stock or having engaged in other irregularities, with the consequences
provided pursuant to NRS §78.250. The Board provides the notice to all holders of all the certificates
that the failure to submit an Application Form for replacement will be treated as the grounds for
appropriate invocation of NRS §78.250. Namely, the shareholders who fail to timely submit Application
Forms will have their rights (including voting rights) suspended until further determination by the Board.
That suspension of the voting right(s) will commence, in the event no Application Form is filed, from July
27, 2011.
Pursuant to §78.250.2 (see appendices below), the Board decided to suspend and cancel certificates and
all associated rights as to E*Trade effective June 8, 2011 through a stop on the shares and June 27, 2011
for the cancellation.
As stated, if the TA identifies a “share imbalance” in any of the 13 brokerage firms’ accounts, upon
receipt of shareholder Associated Forms and associated requested documents, this will be reported to
the Company who will (i) pass all details to the applicable regulators to address and (ii) inform the
shareholders. The issue being that as stated by E*Trade below, if there is a “share imbalance” and
1 0 4 3 2 B a l l s F o r d R o a d S u i t e 3 0 0 M a n a s s a s V i r g i n i a 2 0 1 0 9
6
currently they “cannot identify who owns legitimate or illegitimate shares”, it would be a matter for the
regulators and or legal action to deduce who is in fact the rightful owner of the shares of EIGH.pk,
having been legally and lawfully purchased in cash under contract through the given brokerage firm. It
would not be appropriate for the Company to make that decision and discriminate against legally
confirmed shareholders who, in fact, paid for “phantom” (short) shares. As indicated below, EIGH will
continue its investigation into 12 other brokerage firms resulting in the cancellation (pursuant to Nevada
§78.250) of all shares held in these accounts if conclusive evidence, in the opinion of the Company, is
uncovered and determined.
Conclusion
The above Decisions have been approved in their entirety.
Summary of Board Decisions and Actions
1. Under Nevada law, the Company will place a stop on the shares held at E*Trade on Wednesday
June 8, 2011 and ultimately cancel all shares, based on confirmed share imbalances, held at
E*Trade brokerage firm on June 27, 2011.
2. The Company will request Directly from E*Trade the return of the physical certificate to the
Company’s TA.
3. All shareholders who believe they hold shares at E*Trade should complete the attached
Application Form below and supply the required documentation as listed and (i) send to the
company address or (ii) e-mail scanned copies.
4. If shareholders have their ownership confirmed, those confirmed shareholders will receive new
replacement certificates. The Company will provide all required documentation and
instructions.
___________________________ Dated: June 6, 2011
Thomas Kelly, President
8000 Inc.
1 0 4 3 2 B a l l s F o r d R o a d S u i t e 3 0 0 M a n a s s a s V i r g i n i a 2 0 1 0 9
7
APPLICATION FORM
8000 INC. (a Nevada Corporation)
APPLICATION FOR REPLACEMENT OF STOCK CERTIFICATE PURSUANT to NRS 78.250 APPROVED
CANCELLATION OF CURRENTLY ISSUED COMMON SHARES
Applicant: ______________________________________________________
Address: ________________________________________________________
Contact tel, fax, e-mail:________________________________________
The Applicant submits herewith the attached documents in support of the Certificate/stock replacement
agreeing to the Company placing a stop on their currently held shares in EIGH.pk identified and held at
E*Trade, and their ultimate cancelation to be replaced with new certificates if required at the conclusion
of the share count undertaken by the Company’s TA.
(a) a copy of their account detailing the number of shares held in their E*Trade account; and
(b) this Application Form as executed below.
This Application Form should be filed with the Company no later than by 4pm EST, June 20, 2011.
Date: _______________, 2011
Registered Name on the Certificate: _____________________________
Authorized Signature: ____________________________
1 0 4 3 2 B a l l s F o r d R o a d S u i t e 3 0 0 M a n a s s a s V i r g i n i a 2 0 1 0 9
8
Appendices
Nevada Revised Statues
NRS 78.235 Stock certificates: Validation; facsimile signatures; uncertificated shares and informational
statements; replacement.
1. Except as otherwise provided in subsection 4, every stockholder is entitled to have a certificate, signed by
officers or agents designated by the corporation for the purpose, certifying the number of shares in the corporation
owned by the stockholder. A corporation has no power to issue a certificate in bearer form, and any such certificate
that is issued is void and of no force or effect.
2. Whenever any certificate is countersigned or otherwise authenticated by a transfer agent or transfer clerk, and
by a registrar, then a facsimile of the signatures of the officers or agents, the transfer agent or transfer clerk or the
registrar of the corporation may be printed or lithographed upon the certificate in lieu of the actual signatures. If a
corporation uses facsimile signatures of its officers and agents on its stock certificates, it cannot act as registrar of its
own stock, but its transfer agent and registrar may be identical if the institution acting in those dual capacities
countersigns or otherwise authenticates any stock certificates in both capacities.
3. If any officer or officers who have signed, or whose facsimile signature or signatures have been used on, any
certificate or certificates for stock cease to be an officer or officers of the corporation, whether because of death,
resignation or other reason, before the certificate or certificates have been delivered by the corporation, the
certificate or certificates may nevertheless be adopted by the corporation and be issued and delivered as though the
person or persons who signed the certificate or certificates, or whose facsimile signature or signatures have been
used thereon, had not ceased to be an officer or officers of the corporation.
4. Unless otherwise provided in the articles of incorporation or bylaws, the board of directors may authorize the
issuance of uncertificated shares of some or all of the shares of any or all of its classes or series. The issuance of
uncertificated shares has no effect on existing certificates for shares until surrendered to the corporation, or on the
respective rights and obligations of the stockholders. Unless otherwise provided by a specific statute, the rights and
obligations of stockholders are identical whether or not their shares of stock are represented by certificates.
5. Within a reasonable time after the issuance or transfer of shares without certificates, the corporation shall
send the stockholder a written statement containing the information required on the certificates pursuant to
subsection 1. At least annually thereafter, the corporation shall provide to its stockholders of record, a written
statement confirming the information contained in the informational statement previously sent pursuant to this
subsection.
6. Unless otherwise provided in the articles of incorporation or bylaws, a corporation may issue a new
certificate of stock or, if authorized by the board of directors pursuant to subsection 4, uncertificated shares in place
of a certificate previously issued by it and alleged to have been lost, stolen or destroyed. A corporation may require
an owner or legal representative of an owner of a lost, stolen or destroyed certificate to give the corporation a bond
or other security sufficient to indemnify it against any claim that may be made against it for the alleged loss, theft or
destruction of a certificate, or the issuance of a new certificate or uncertificated shares.
[Part 18:177:1925; A 1929, 413; 1937, 8; 1931 NCL § 1617]—(NRS A 1965, 1012; 1987, 579; 1991, 1226;
1993, 959; 2001, 1367, 3199; 2007, 2417)
1 0 4 3 2 B a l l s F o r d R o a d S u i t e 3 0 0 M a n a s s a s V i r g i n i a 2 0 1 0 9
9
NRS 78.250 Cancellation of outstanding certificates or change in informational statements: Issuance of new
certificates or statements; order for surrender of certificates; penalties for failure to comply.
1. When the articles of incorporation are amended in any way affecting the statements contained in certificates
for outstanding shares or informational statements sent pursuant to NRS 78.235, or it becomes desirable for any
reason, in the discretion of the board of directors, to cancel any outstanding certificate for shares and issue a new
certificate therefore conforming to the rights of the holder, the board of directors may send additional informational
statements as provided in NRS 78.235 and order any holders of outstanding certificates for shares to surrender and
exchange them for new certificates within a reasonable time to be fixed by the board of directors.
2. Such an order may provide that the holder of any certificate so ordered to be surrendered is not entitled to
vote or to receive distributions or exercise any of the other rights of stockholders of record until the holder of the
certificate has complied with the order, but the order operates to suspend such rights only after notice and until
compliance.
3. The duty to surrender any outstanding certificates may also be enforced by action at law.
[18a:177:1925; added 1937, 8; 1931 NCL § 1617.01]—(NRS A 1987, 580; 1993, 960)
NRS 78.015 Applicability of chapter; effect on corporations existing before April 1, 1925.
1. The provisions of this chapter apply to:
(a) Corporations organized in this State on or after October 1, 1991, except:
(1) Where the provisions of chapters 80, 84 and 89 of NRS are inconsistent with the provisions of this
chapter;
(2) Corporations expressly excluded by the provisions of this chapter; and
(3) Corporations governed by the provisions of NRS 81.170 to 81.540, inclusive, and chapter 82 of NRS.
(b) Corporations whose charters are renewed or revived in the manner provided in NRS 78.730.
(c) Corporations organized and still existing under this chapter before October 1, 1991, or any prior act or any
amendment thereto.
(d) Close corporations, unless otherwise provided in chapter 78A of NRS.
(e) All insurance companies, mutual fire insurance companies, surety companies, express companies, railroad
companies, and public utility companies now existing and formed before October 1, 1991, under any other act or
law of this State, subject to any special provisions concerning any class of corporations inconsistent with the
provisions of this chapter, in which case the special provisions continue to apply.
2. Neither the existence of corporations formed or existing before April 1, 1925, nor any liability, cause of
action, right, privilege or immunity validly existing in favor of or against any such corporation on April 1, 1925, are
affected, abridged, taken away or impaired by this chapter, or by any change in the requirements for the formation of
corporations provided by this chapter, nor by the amendment or repeal of any laws under which such prior existing
corporations were formed or created.
[1:177:1925; A 1935, 146; 1937, 4; 1945, 196; 1943 NCL § 1600]—(NRS A 1989, 948; 1991, 1207; 1995,
2094)
1 0 4 3 2 B a l l s F o r d R o a d S u i t e 3 0 0 M a n a s s a s V i r g i n i a 2 0 1 0 9
10
E*Trade Correspondence
From: Arndt, Paul F
Sent: 25 April 2011 15:42
To: Jonathan; Fioribello, Paul; Eberhart, Courtney; Dror, Eli
Cc: Bishop, Robert L; Baker, Anthony
Subject: RE: 8000 Inc (EIGH.pk) Shareholder complaints and discrepancies
I have not acted on the fails since the corporate actions has not allocated yet.
I think you need to see if maybe our Fail Control or Buying department has?
From: Jonathan
Sent: Monday, April 25, 2011 3:39 PM
To: Fioribello, Paul; Arndt, Paul F; 'Eberhart, Courtney'; Dror, Eli
Cc: Bishop, Robert L; Baker, Anthony
Subject: RE: 8000 Inc (EIGH.pk) Shareholder complaints and discrepancies
Hi Paul,
Thanks for your reply, you guys have been very helpful and proactive, which I am grateful for.
Please can you advise whether you have acted on the fails to deliver and receive under 11800?
Obviously I am aware that FINRA are watching, monitoring and making contact so we should all work
together to get this resolved.
With thanks,
Jonathan
1 0 4 3 2 B a l l s F o r d R o a d S u i t e 3 0 0 M a n a s s a s V i r g i n i a 2 0 1 0 9
11
From: Fioribello, Paul [mailto:Paul.Fioribello@ridgeclearing.com]
Sent: 25 April 2011 08:37
To: Arndt, Paul F; Eberhart, Courtney; Dror, Eli; jonathan@tbgfund.com
Cc: Bishop, Robert L; Baker, Anthony
Subject: RE: 8000 Inc (EIGH.pk) Shareholder complaints and discrepancies
Jonathan is there any other information that is required?
From: Arndt, Paul F
Sent: Monday, April 25, 2011 8:23 AM
To: 'Eberhart, Courtney'; Dror, Eli; 'jonathan@tbgfund.com'
Cc: Fioribello, Paul; Bishop, Robert L; Baker, Anthony
Subject: RE: 8000 Inc (EIGH.pk) Shareholder complaints and discrepancies
Jonathan,
Currently we hold the following
Fail to Receive 95,167 shares
Fail to Deliver 78,067 shares
Firm name (Physical) 43,196,703 shares
Physical Box 97,766 shares
From: Eberhart, Courtney
Sent: Wednesday, April 20, 2011 2:34 PM
To: Dror, Eli
Cc: Fioribello, Paul; Bishop, Robert L; Arndt, Paul F
Subject: RE: 8000 Inc (EIGH.pk) Shareholder complaints and discrepancies
1 0 4 3 2 B a l l s F o r d R o a d S u i t e 3 0 0 M a n a s s a s V i r g i n i a 2 0 1 0 9
12
Ok thanks Eli, I figured it had been passed on now.
Paul please keep me in the loop on this mess so I can field the customer inquiries. Currently I am just
advising customers that we are working with the company and there is no action required from the
bene holder.
Please let me know if I can assist with anything.
Courtney Eberhart
TL - Risk Trading Team
E*Trade Financial Corp.
From: Dror, Eli
Sent: Wednesday, April 20, 2011 2:26 PM
To: Eberhart, Courtney
Cc: Fioribello, Paul; Bishop, Robert L; Arndt, Paul F
Subject: 8000 Inc (EIGH.pk) Shareholder complaints and discrepancies
Courtney,
I am not handling this, I only did the initial inquiry with the company because we received a Voluntary
Tender instruction from Etrade in a workflow. This is a mandatory offer is handled by Paul Arndt.
SECURITY: E008256
8000 INC
CUSIP: 28251Q109
Thank you,
1 0 4 3 2 B a l l s F o r d R o a d S u i t e 3 0 0 M a n a s s a s V i r g i n i a 2 0 1 0 9
13
Eli
From: Eberhart, Courtney
Sent: Wednesday, April 20, 2011 2:03 PM
To: Dror, Eli
Subject: FW: 8000 Inc (EIGH.pk) Shareholder complaints and discrepancies
Importance: High
Hey Eli, are you doing anything with this or has it been passed on to someone else? This company is
creating a frenzy amongst the shareholders and I want to make sure we are doing what we can get to rid
of this position and evaluating our interest in taking on the new.
Thanks
Court
SEC Correspondence – Confirmation of acknowledged short positions in EIGH and the SEC’s
commitment to address.
1 0 4 3 2 B a l l s F o r d R o a d S u i t e 3 0 0 M a n a s s a s V i r g i n i a 2 0 1 0 9
14
1 0 4 3 2 B a l l s F o r d R o a d S u i t e 3 0 0 M a n a s s a s V i r g i n i a 2 0 1 0 9
15
1 0 4 3 2 B a l l s F o r d R o a d S u i t e 3 0 0 M a n a s s a s V i r g i n i a 2 0 1 0 9
16
1 0 4 3 2 B a l l s F o r d R o a d S u i t e 3 0 0 M a n a s s a s V i r g i n i a 2 0 1 0 9
17
1 0 4 3 2 B a l l s F o r d R o a d S u i t e 3 0 0 M a n a s s a s V i r g i n i a 2 0 1 0 9
18
1 0 4 3 2 B a l l s F o r d R o a d S u i t e 3 0 0 M a n a s s a s V i r g i n i a 2 0 1 0 9
19
1 0 4 3 2 B a l l s F o r d R o a d S u i t e 3 0 0 M a n a s s a s V i r g i n i a 2 0 1 0 9
20
If there are any questions, please direct them to the enquiries@8000inc.net.
www.8000inc.net
Keep updated on 8000 Inc. developments on Facebook
-ENDSThis
news release contains forward-looking statements that are subject to certain risks and uncertainties that may cause actual
results to differ materially from those projected on the basis of such forward-looking statements. The words "estimate," "project,"
"intends," "expects," "believes," and similar expressions are intended to identify forward-looking statements. Such forward-looking
statements are made based on management's beliefs, as well as assumptions made by, and information currently available to,
management pursuant to the "safe-harbour" provisions of the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995. For a more complete
description of these and other risk factors that may affect the future performance of 8000 Inc., see published disclosure documents
at www.OTCMarkets.com Readers are cautioned not to place undue reliance on these forward-looking statements, which speak
only as of the date made and the Company undertakes no obligation to disclose any revision to these forward-looking statements to
reflect events or circumstances after the date made or to reflect the occurrence of unanticipated events.
Shareholder Statement - Board Meeting and Board Decisions June 3, 2011
Relating to the
Illegal Short Positions Believed Held in 8000 Inc. (EIGH.pk)
Summary: 8000 Inc. Evidenced Naked Short Concerns, Board Decisions and Actions
The Board of 8000 Inc. (hereafter, “EIGH” or the “Company) received and examined volunteered
shareholder brokerage account records, letters issued by the SEC and statements made specifically by
E*Trade in April 2011. That examination revealed, to the best of our analysis, that there is (by admission
and through verified shareholder records and subsequent share count previously submitted to the
regulators--and made available to the public) an illegal naked short position held within EIGH.pk, the
trading symbol of the company’s common. This situation, the Company believes, has defrauded the
Company and its shareholders and constitutes manipulation of the Company’s stock according to SEC
and/or FINRA rules. And critical to the fraud allegation is this simple fact: EIGH.pk is not eligible for
short sales (since it is not DTC-eligible—i.e., not transferable electronically). The consequence is that
EIGH shareholders who have purchased Company stock in cash and as confirmed by E*Trade on April 27,
2011 may or may not own legitimate EIGH stock and have, in our considered judgment, been defrauded
by E*Trade (or any other brokerage firm through whom shorted shares were bought)!
Very specifically, on April 25, 2011, E*Trade, through e-mail communications with Company
representatives admitted short positions held through failures to deliver and received and that they
would not address until requested to do so through the proposed share exchange announced for May
20, 2011. The subsequent communications between the shareholders of EIGH and the SEC and the
recent share count published again substantiates, in our opinion, both the Company’s belief of naked
short positions held in EIGH.pk and the May 3, 2011 admission of the SEC and not E*Trade.
In an effort to satisfy our fiduciary duty to our shareholders, the Company has tried a number of actions
(including seeking FNRA and SEC cooperation to have an exchange of common for voting preferred,
physical certificates required to qualify) to eliminate such illegal shorts. Since the Company’s requested
regulatory intervention has so far been ignored, the Board has resolved to proceed with the
replacement of outstanding share certificates, to bring the stock issuance into compliance with the law
and the number of shares lawfully and correctly issued by the Company. The Board will instruct the
Company’s Transfer Agent (the “TA”) to register all applications for replacement of all provable
legitimate EIGH.pk stock held within E*Trade brokerage accounts.
1 0 4 3 2 B a l l s F o r d R o a d S u i t e 3 0 0 M a n a s s a s V i r g i n i a 2 0 1 0 9
2
Decisions of the Meeting of the Board of Directors of 8000 Inc., a Nevada Corporation Formed July 21,
2007, Held on June 3, 2011.
a) Procedural Considerations
Having held a board meeting on June 3, 2011, through Tom Kelly, its sole Officer and Director, the EIGH
Board established that it had a quorum for the meeting which enabled it to make decisions, pursuant to
statutory requirements, as well as in conformity with EIGH’s corporate By-Laws.
The Board’s meeting was convened after receipt of the disclosures detailing the shareholder brokerage
account records and the activities and disclosures of E*Trade.
The Board concluded, based on evidence submitted by its consultant, Jonathan Bryant, including from
shareholders and brokerage firms, was that there was, in its judgment, significant and demonstrable
evidence that showed that unresolved and unaccounted naked short positions were held in EIGH.pk
stock.
Continuing its investigation of underlying circumstances, with Mr. Bryant’s leadership, the Board
believes it can demonstrate, through an empirical count of shares held by the shareholders of EIGH and
further confirmed through correspondence from the SEC (albeit in amounts believed to be significantly
undercounted) and with the brokerage firms themselves. Currently, E*Trade will be the focus of the
Company’s actions being the only brokerage to admit short positions held by them in EIGH.pk, but the
Company is now undertaking further examination of an additional 12 brokerage firms it is convinced
hold short positions.
The Board believes that these admissions of short positions unresolved are illegal under the applicable
SEC and FINRA rules and regulations relating to creating and maintaining a fair and orderly market as
defined by SEC Rules, the SEC’s mission statement and FINRA Rule 6490. EIGH notes that it has had no
support from the regulators (at least to this date), including denial of the requested FINRA common for
voting preferred exchange corporate action (deemed necessary to protect the interest of both the
shareholders and the Company by determining and correcting these improper stock positions), even
though we believe there are significant illegal short positions in stock of EIGH. The Company, in fact,
believes this situation has been on-going for several years and in its opinion is that the true figure of
shorts held is significantly greater than those declared through the Shareholder Statement dated May
31, 2011.
1 0 4 3 2 B a l l s F o r d R o a d S u i t e 3 0 0 M a n a s s a s V i r g i n i a 2 0 1 0 9
3
Board decisions resulting from June 3, 2011 Board Meeting.
§ 1) Board Decision (Upon Examination of Shareholder Brokerage Accounts)
The Board resolved to authorize its counsel, invoking Nevada state law, to compel correction of the
acknowledged “share imbalance” prior to the cancellation of shares held at or by E*Trade Brokerage by
June 27, 2011. The Board also authorized to place a stop on the stocks held in E*Trade accounts as a
measure to inhibit what it believes could be further “share imbalance” activities. Furthermore, as
E*Trade have admitted that they do not know who owns legitimate or illegitimate shares and that there
are short positions held within their accounts on behalf of their clients, under NRS 78.235, the
shareholder has rights to ownership of physical certificates, especially after paying for them through
their brokerage account. As E*trade, after requests, and the regulators have left the resolution of the
matter to the Company, the only realistic method for ascertaining legally the ownership of duly
purchased shares in EIGH.pk in E*Trade, knowing the facts, is to stop further transactions and to identify
which shareholder hold which shares and how many. Thus placing a stop on the shares is the only
feasible and workable method to protect the shareholders best interest knowing there is an illegal short
position held at E*Trade. The Board reiterated that it will do everything within its capability and reduced
finances to foreclose any person or entity’s ability to allow the corporation and its assets to be used for
illegal purposes or personal enrichment in violation of various laws, including the federal or state laws,
now or at any time in the future.
Specifically, pursuant to Nevada Revised Statutes for Governing Corporate Law and Corporate
Responsibility (see appendices below), NRS §78.250 provides, in relevant part, that if “…it becomes
desirable for any reason, in the discretion of the board of directors, to cancel any outstanding certificate
for shares and issue a new certificate therefore conforming to the rights of the holder, the board of
directors may …order any holders of outstanding certificates for shares to surrender and exchange them
for new certificates within a reasonable time to be fixed by the board of directors…” Given that E*Trade
and the SEC each acknowledge short positions held in EIGH, the Board has concluded it has authority
and should take action pursuant to NRS §78.250—based on EIGH’s count of shareholders brokerage
account holdings and the figures generated through the certified transfer agents reports. This exercise
will continue with a full examination of up to 13 brokerage firms identified which the Company believes
holds short positions who will under the same conditions have all stock held within their accounts
cancelled with immediate effect and the Company’s shareholders with accounts at these brokerage
firms again being asked to provide details and submit the Application Form described below and
attached. Details of these actions by the Company will follow the same process and shareholders will be
1 0 4 3 2 B a l l s F o r d R o a d S u i t e 3 0 0 M a n a s s a s V i r g i n i a 2 0 1 0 9
4
instructed accordingly moving forward. The applicability of NRS 78.250 is dealt within “NRS 78.015
Applicability of chapter” (See appendices).
The other issue before the Board related to whether certain stock sold to shareholders through E*Trade
were issued technically without the authorized capital being available, this being confirmed through
E*Trade’s statement of April 27, 2011 that “…[W]e are not able to determine who owns legitimate or
illegitimate shares…”. The Company reviewed and affirmed its conclusion on Nevada corporate law,
namely NRS 78.235 which provides that “every stockholder in a Nevada corporation is entitled to have a
certificate, signed by the officers or agents, certifying the number of shares in the corporation owned by
the stockholder” (see appendices for full text). As a result, E*Trade by its own admission holds an
oversold and over purchased short position in EIGH.pk or, more simply, holds illegal naked short
positions.
We believe the foregoing identified naked short positions are in violation of SEC and/or FINRA
requirements. In that context, the Company resolved to order the replacement of the outstanding
certificates for E*Trade through the cancellation of all shares they hold on 27, June, 2011. In the first
instance, all share held in E*Trade accounts will have a stop placed on them on Wednesday June 8,
2011. The Company will request physical delivery of the shares held in the street name at and on behalf
of E*Trade customers and shareholders of EIGH.pk to the TA. Upon receipt of the share certificates from
both E*Trade, and the requested documentation from the shareholders, itemized below, will be
cancelled or returned. In the event of a “share imbalance” (the evident code phrase of choice of these
shorting firms), the Company will provide all information to the regulators and authorities accordingly.
Shareholders who have shares held within E*Trade accounts should send the following as proof of
ownership together with the completed, attached Application Form directly to (i) 8000 Inc., Attn:
Thomas Kelly, President, 10432 Balls Ford Road, Suite 300, Manassas, Virginia 20109 or (ii) e-mail
directly scanned copies to enquiries@8000inc.net. The Application Forms require a shareholder to
submit the following (a) a copy of their account detailing the number of shares held in their E*Trade
account and (b) a signed approved application form attached below. These documents will be compiled
and sent to the TA.
Pursuant to provision of “reasonable time” under NRS §78.250, the Board has determined that the
documents should be received by the Company and or its transfer agent by 4pm EST June 20, 2011
being 14 days after the notification of the cancellation of the shares. The Company and TA will verify
that the applying shareholders have proper ownership rights to the stock memorialized by the account
1 0 4 3 2 B a l l s F o r d R o a d S u i t e 3 0 0 M a n a s s a s V i r g i n i a 2 0 1 0 9
5
details and Application Form submitted and will proceed with replacing the old certificate/stock with a
new certificate or certificates upon confirmation by the TA that the shares recorded by the shareholders
are correct, valid and legitimate as per the certified shareholder records. If, however, the shareholder
affirmations prove that there are more shares sold to and held by shareholders with E*Trade fiducially
as this would indicate fraud, the Company will pass on the information to the regulators and or law
enforcement agencies.
All verified share holders of legitimate shares of EIGH.pk purchased through and held in E*Trade
accounts will receive a new certificate for the same number, value and rights of shares as duly acquired
through E*Trade. If it is identified that more shares were sold by E*Trade as recorded in shareholder
accounts, this information will be made public and submitted as evidence to the regulators for action.
Upon receipt of the required documents from the shareholders, a count will be undertaken to establish
the true and accurate numbers of shares sold to investors by each individual brokerage firm. The total
number of shares proven by submission of the Application Form will be measured against the certified
shareholder list provided to the Company’s Transfer Agent, in turn provided to the Company.
Furthermore, the Board concluded that such replacement of the certificates serves the best interests of
the good faith shareholders, whose interest and voting rights which we believe were illegally diluted by
the trading firms in engaging in naked short selling of EIGH.pk.
A failure to file an Application Form for replacement will be treated by the Board as the presumption of
a holder’s not having paid for the stock or having engaged in other irregularities, with the consequences
provided pursuant to NRS §78.250. The Board provides the notice to all holders of all the certificates
that the failure to submit an Application Form for replacement will be treated as the grounds for
appropriate invocation of NRS §78.250. Namely, the shareholders who fail to timely submit Application
Forms will have their rights (including voting rights) suspended until further determination by the Board.
That suspension of the voting right(s) will commence, in the event no Application Form is filed, from July
27, 2011.
Pursuant to §78.250.2 (see appendices below), the Board decided to suspend and cancel certificates and
all associated rights as to E*Trade effective June 8, 2011 through a stop on the shares and June 27, 2011
for the cancellation.
As stated, if the TA identifies a “share imbalance” in any of the 13 brokerage firms’ accounts, upon
receipt of shareholder Associated Forms and associated requested documents, this will be reported to
the Company who will (i) pass all details to the applicable regulators to address and (ii) inform the
shareholders. The issue being that as stated by E*Trade below, if there is a “share imbalance” and
1 0 4 3 2 B a l l s F o r d R o a d S u i t e 3 0 0 M a n a s s a s V i r g i n i a 2 0 1 0 9
6
currently they “cannot identify who owns legitimate or illegitimate shares”, it would be a matter for the
regulators and or legal action to deduce who is in fact the rightful owner of the shares of EIGH.pk,
having been legally and lawfully purchased in cash under contract through the given brokerage firm. It
would not be appropriate for the Company to make that decision and discriminate against legally
confirmed shareholders who, in fact, paid for “phantom” (short) shares. As indicated below, EIGH will
continue its investigation into 12 other brokerage firms resulting in the cancellation (pursuant to Nevada
§78.250) of all shares held in these accounts if conclusive evidence, in the opinion of the Company, is
uncovered and determined.
Conclusion
The above Decisions have been approved in their entirety.
Summary of Board Decisions and Actions
1. Under Nevada law, the Company will place a stop on the shares held at E*Trade on Wednesday
June 8, 2011 and ultimately cancel all shares, based on confirmed share imbalances, held at
E*Trade brokerage firm on June 27, 2011.
2. The Company will request Directly from E*Trade the return of the physical certificate to the
Company’s TA.
3. All shareholders who believe they hold shares at E*Trade should complete the attached
Application Form below and supply the required documentation as listed and (i) send to the
company address or (ii) e-mail scanned copies.
4. If shareholders have their ownership confirmed, those confirmed shareholders will receive new
replacement certificates. The Company will provide all required documentation and
instructions.
___________________________ Dated: June 6, 2011
Thomas Kelly, President
8000 Inc.
1 0 4 3 2 B a l l s F o r d R o a d S u i t e 3 0 0 M a n a s s a s V i r g i n i a 2 0 1 0 9
7
APPLICATION FORM
8000 INC. (a Nevada Corporation)
APPLICATION FOR REPLACEMENT OF STOCK CERTIFICATE PURSUANT to NRS 78.250 APPROVED
CANCELLATION OF CURRENTLY ISSUED COMMON SHARES
Applicant: ______________________________________________________
Address: ________________________________________________________
Contact tel, fax, e-mail:________________________________________
The Applicant submits herewith the attached documents in support of the Certificate/stock replacement
agreeing to the Company placing a stop on their currently held shares in EIGH.pk identified and held at
E*Trade, and their ultimate cancelation to be replaced with new certificates if required at the conclusion
of the share count undertaken by the Company’s TA.
(a) a copy of their account detailing the number of shares held in their E*Trade account; and
(b) this Application Form as executed below.
This Application Form should be filed with the Company no later than by 4pm EST, June 20, 2011.
Date: _______________, 2011
Registered Name on the Certificate: _____________________________
Authorized Signature: ____________________________
1 0 4 3 2 B a l l s F o r d R o a d S u i t e 3 0 0 M a n a s s a s V i r g i n i a 2 0 1 0 9
8
Appendices
Nevada Revised Statues
NRS 78.235 Stock certificates: Validation; facsimile signatures; uncertificated shares and informational
statements; replacement.
1. Except as otherwise provided in subsection 4, every stockholder is entitled to have a certificate, signed by
officers or agents designated by the corporation for the purpose, certifying the number of shares in the corporation
owned by the stockholder. A corporation has no power to issue a certificate in bearer form, and any such certificate
that is issued is void and of no force or effect.
2. Whenever any certificate is countersigned or otherwise authenticated by a transfer agent or transfer clerk, and
by a registrar, then a facsimile of the signatures of the officers or agents, the transfer agent or transfer clerk or the
registrar of the corporation may be printed or lithographed upon the certificate in lieu of the actual signatures. If a
corporation uses facsimile signatures of its officers and agents on its stock certificates, it cannot act as registrar of its
own stock, but its transfer agent and registrar may be identical if the institution acting in those dual capacities
countersigns or otherwise authenticates any stock certificates in both capacities.
3. If any officer or officers who have signed, or whose facsimile signature or signatures have been used on, any
certificate or certificates for stock cease to be an officer or officers of the corporation, whether because of death,
resignation or other reason, before the certificate or certificates have been delivered by the corporation, the
certificate or certificates may nevertheless be adopted by the corporation and be issued and delivered as though the
person or persons who signed the certificate or certificates, or whose facsimile signature or signatures have been
used thereon, had not ceased to be an officer or officers of the corporation.
4. Unless otherwise provided in the articles of incorporation or bylaws, the board of directors may authorize the
issuance of uncertificated shares of some or all of the shares of any or all of its classes or series. The issuance of
uncertificated shares has no effect on existing certificates for shares until surrendered to the corporation, or on the
respective rights and obligations of the stockholders. Unless otherwise provided by a specific statute, the rights and
obligations of stockholders are identical whether or not their shares of stock are represented by certificates.
5. Within a reasonable time after the issuance or transfer of shares without certificates, the corporation shall
send the stockholder a written statement containing the information required on the certificates pursuant to
subsection 1. At least annually thereafter, the corporation shall provide to its stockholders of record, a written
statement confirming the information contained in the informational statement previously sent pursuant to this
subsection.
6. Unless otherwise provided in the articles of incorporation or bylaws, a corporation may issue a new
certificate of stock or, if authorized by the board of directors pursuant to subsection 4, uncertificated shares in place
of a certificate previously issued by it and alleged to have been lost, stolen or destroyed. A corporation may require
an owner or legal representative of an owner of a lost, stolen or destroyed certificate to give the corporation a bond
or other security sufficient to indemnify it against any claim that may be made against it for the alleged loss, theft or
destruction of a certificate, or the issuance of a new certificate or uncertificated shares.
[Part 18:177:1925; A 1929, 413; 1937, 8; 1931 NCL § 1617]—(NRS A 1965, 1012; 1987, 579; 1991, 1226;
1993, 959; 2001, 1367, 3199; 2007, 2417)
1 0 4 3 2 B a l l s F o r d R o a d S u i t e 3 0 0 M a n a s s a s V i r g i n i a 2 0 1 0 9
9
NRS 78.250 Cancellation of outstanding certificates or change in informational statements: Issuance of new
certificates or statements; order for surrender of certificates; penalties for failure to comply.
1. When the articles of incorporation are amended in any way affecting the statements contained in certificates
for outstanding shares or informational statements sent pursuant to NRS 78.235, or it becomes desirable for any
reason, in the discretion of the board of directors, to cancel any outstanding certificate for shares and issue a new
certificate therefore conforming to the rights of the holder, the board of directors may send additional informational
statements as provided in NRS 78.235 and order any holders of outstanding certificates for shares to surrender and
exchange them for new certificates within a reasonable time to be fixed by the board of directors.
2. Such an order may provide that the holder of any certificate so ordered to be surrendered is not entitled to
vote or to receive distributions or exercise any of the other rights of stockholders of record until the holder of the
certificate has complied with the order, but the order operates to suspend such rights only after notice and until
compliance.
3. The duty to surrender any outstanding certificates may also be enforced by action at law.
[18a:177:1925; added 1937, 8; 1931 NCL § 1617.01]—(NRS A 1987, 580; 1993, 960)
NRS 78.015 Applicability of chapter; effect on corporations existing before April 1, 1925.
1. The provisions of this chapter apply to:
(a) Corporations organized in this State on or after October 1, 1991, except:
(1) Where the provisions of chapters 80, 84 and 89 of NRS are inconsistent with the provisions of this
chapter;
(2) Corporations expressly excluded by the provisions of this chapter; and
(3) Corporations governed by the provisions of NRS 81.170 to 81.540, inclusive, and chapter 82 of NRS.
(b) Corporations whose charters are renewed or revived in the manner provided in NRS 78.730.
(c) Corporations organized and still existing under this chapter before October 1, 1991, or any prior act or any
amendment thereto.
(d) Close corporations, unless otherwise provided in chapter 78A of NRS.
(e) All insurance companies, mutual fire insurance companies, surety companies, express companies, railroad
companies, and public utility companies now existing and formed before October 1, 1991, under any other act or
law of this State, subject to any special provisions concerning any class of corporations inconsistent with the
provisions of this chapter, in which case the special provisions continue to apply.
2. Neither the existence of corporations formed or existing before April 1, 1925, nor any liability, cause of
action, right, privilege or immunity validly existing in favor of or against any such corporation on April 1, 1925, are
affected, abridged, taken away or impaired by this chapter, or by any change in the requirements for the formation of
corporations provided by this chapter, nor by the amendment or repeal of any laws under which such prior existing
corporations were formed or created.
[1:177:1925; A 1935, 146; 1937, 4; 1945, 196; 1943 NCL § 1600]—(NRS A 1989, 948; 1991, 1207; 1995,
2094)
1 0 4 3 2 B a l l s F o r d R o a d S u i t e 3 0 0 M a n a s s a s V i r g i n i a 2 0 1 0 9
10
E*Trade Correspondence
From: Arndt, Paul F
Sent: 25 April 2011 15:42
To: Jonathan; Fioribello, Paul; Eberhart, Courtney; Dror, Eli
Cc: Bishop, Robert L; Baker, Anthony
Subject: RE: 8000 Inc (EIGH.pk) Shareholder complaints and discrepancies
I have not acted on the fails since the corporate actions has not allocated yet.
I think you need to see if maybe our Fail Control or Buying department has?
From: Jonathan
Sent: Monday, April 25, 2011 3:39 PM
To: Fioribello, Paul; Arndt, Paul F; 'Eberhart, Courtney'; Dror, Eli
Cc: Bishop, Robert L; Baker, Anthony
Subject: RE: 8000 Inc (EIGH.pk) Shareholder complaints and discrepancies
Hi Paul,
Thanks for your reply, you guys have been very helpful and proactive, which I am grateful for.
Please can you advise whether you have acted on the fails to deliver and receive under 11800?
Obviously I am aware that FINRA are watching, monitoring and making contact so we should all work
together to get this resolved.
With thanks,
Jonathan
1 0 4 3 2 B a l l s F o r d R o a d S u i t e 3 0 0 M a n a s s a s V i r g i n i a 2 0 1 0 9
11
From: Fioribello, Paul [mailto:Paul.Fioribello@ridgeclearing.com]
Sent: 25 April 2011 08:37
To: Arndt, Paul F; Eberhart, Courtney; Dror, Eli; jonathan@tbgfund.com
Cc: Bishop, Robert L; Baker, Anthony
Subject: RE: 8000 Inc (EIGH.pk) Shareholder complaints and discrepancies
Jonathan is there any other information that is required?
From: Arndt, Paul F
Sent: Monday, April 25, 2011 8:23 AM
To: 'Eberhart, Courtney'; Dror, Eli; 'jonathan@tbgfund.com'
Cc: Fioribello, Paul; Bishop, Robert L; Baker, Anthony
Subject: RE: 8000 Inc (EIGH.pk) Shareholder complaints and discrepancies
Jonathan,
Currently we hold the following
Fail to Receive 95,167 shares
Fail to Deliver 78,067 shares
Firm name (Physical) 43,196,703 shares
Physical Box 97,766 shares
From: Eberhart, Courtney
Sent: Wednesday, April 20, 2011 2:34 PM
To: Dror, Eli
Cc: Fioribello, Paul; Bishop, Robert L; Arndt, Paul F
Subject: RE: 8000 Inc (EIGH.pk) Shareholder complaints and discrepancies
1 0 4 3 2 B a l l s F o r d R o a d S u i t e 3 0 0 M a n a s s a s V i r g i n i a 2 0 1 0 9
12
Ok thanks Eli, I figured it had been passed on now.
Paul please keep me in the loop on this mess so I can field the customer inquiries. Currently I am just
advising customers that we are working with the company and there is no action required from the
bene holder.
Please let me know if I can assist with anything.
Courtney Eberhart
TL - Risk Trading Team
E*Trade Financial Corp.
From: Dror, Eli
Sent: Wednesday, April 20, 2011 2:26 PM
To: Eberhart, Courtney
Cc: Fioribello, Paul; Bishop, Robert L; Arndt, Paul F
Subject: 8000 Inc (EIGH.pk) Shareholder complaints and discrepancies
Courtney,
I am not handling this, I only did the initial inquiry with the company because we received a Voluntary
Tender instruction from Etrade in a workflow. This is a mandatory offer is handled by Paul Arndt.
SECURITY: E008256
8000 INC
CUSIP: 28251Q109
Thank you,
1 0 4 3 2 B a l l s F o r d R o a d S u i t e 3 0 0 M a n a s s a s V i r g i n i a 2 0 1 0 9
13
Eli
From: Eberhart, Courtney
Sent: Wednesday, April 20, 2011 2:03 PM
To: Dror, Eli
Subject: FW: 8000 Inc (EIGH.pk) Shareholder complaints and discrepancies
Importance: High
Hey Eli, are you doing anything with this or has it been passed on to someone else? This company is
creating a frenzy amongst the shareholders and I want to make sure we are doing what we can get to rid
of this position and evaluating our interest in taking on the new.
Thanks
Court
SEC Correspondence – Confirmation of acknowledged short positions in EIGH and the SEC’s
commitment to address.
1 0 4 3 2 B a l l s F o r d R o a d S u i t e 3 0 0 M a n a s s a s V i r g i n i a 2 0 1 0 9
14
1 0 4 3 2 B a l l s F o r d R o a d S u i t e 3 0 0 M a n a s s a s V i r g i n i a 2 0 1 0 9
15
1 0 4 3 2 B a l l s F o r d R o a d S u i t e 3 0 0 M a n a s s a s V i r g i n i a 2 0 1 0 9
16
1 0 4 3 2 B a l l s F o r d R o a d S u i t e 3 0 0 M a n a s s a s V i r g i n i a 2 0 1 0 9
17
1 0 4 3 2 B a l l s F o r d R o a d S u i t e 3 0 0 M a n a s s a s V i r g i n i a 2 0 1 0 9
18
1 0 4 3 2 B a l l s F o r d R o a d S u i t e 3 0 0 M a n a s s a s V i r g i n i a 2 0 1 0 9
19
1 0 4 3 2 B a l l s F o r d R o a d S u i t e 3 0 0 M a n a s s a s V i r g i n i a 2 0 1 0 9
20
If there are any questions, please direct them to the enquiries@8000inc.net.
www.8000inc.net
Keep updated on 8000 Inc. developments on Facebook
-ENDSThis
news release contains forward-looking statements that are subject to certain risks and uncertainties that may cause actual
results to differ materially from those projected on the basis of such forward-looking statements. The words "estimate," "project,"
"intends," "expects," "believes," and similar expressions are intended to identify forward-looking statements. Such forward-looking
statements are made based on management's beliefs, as well as assumptions made by, and information currently available to,
management pursuant to the "safe-harbour" provisions of the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995. For a more complete
description of these and other risk factors that may affect the future performance of 8000 Inc., see published disclosure documents
at www.OTCMarkets.com Readers are cautioned not to place undue reliance on these forward-looking statements, which speak
only as of the date made and the Company undertakes no obligation to disclose any revision to these forward-looking statements to
reflect events or circumstances after the date made or to reflect the occurrence of unanticipated events.
fourkids_9pets: I have always sent my emails direct using lastname, first initial @sec.gov and none have come back fwiw.
schapirom@sec.gov
caseyk@sec.gov etc.
puppydotcom: Is it possible that NMGL is purposely not filing so they will not have a paper trail of the cash they will receive by supplying those who are short and need to buy Preferred A & B shares? I'm not saying that is the case but it surely is something to consider as a possibility imho. Go NMGL!!!
Tom: None of that matters. I don't think you get it. The company stated they would be closing down and liquidating the assets to the shareholders via two dividends of Preferred A & B shares. Do you think eihter the SEC or a Judge is going to prevent the shareholders from receiving those assets? I don't.
Seems like a perfect solution to me. FFGO goes away and yet shareholders get their 3400%+ return via Preferred A's & B's distributed by a task force which provides the Judge and SEC progress reports during the process. Go FFGO!!!
3400%+ return is a beautiful thing!
Gold at $1,552 per ounce this morning! Go RENS!!!
This should not be allowed imho:
http://www.cbsnews.com/sections/60minutes/main3415.shtml
SevenTenEleven: Anything is possible. In a case similar to this that I am aware of the DTCC cleaned out its vault and share certificates totaling over 600 billion shares were distributed to about 50,000 shareholders at no cost by brokerage firms worldwide and were delivered by Federal Express no less. Go FFGO!!!
3400%+ is an awesome return!
SevenTenEleven: Under the scenario I described the record date would be the last day the stock traded. If the SEC issued a revocation notice the company would be given the right to a hearing held before a Judge on an agreed upon date and the stock would still be trading. The company has already announced the liquidating dividends via the Preferred A's and B's and would only have to set up a task force to handle the paperwork and reporting necessary. Anyone short would have to pony up or be reported to both the SEC and the Judge, not something they would want imho. Go FFGO!!!
3400%+ is an awesome return!
puppydotcom: A notice from the SEC regarding revocation could be exactly what the company is waiting for. It would provide a nice clean way for the company to receive the funds from those who have shorted the stock and allow them to pay the shareholders the 3400+% return for our A's & B's. A task force set up to distribute the liquidating dividends supervised by the SEC and a Judge would work for me. Go FFGO!!! A 3400%+ return is a beautiful thing!
Scam Science: The Short and Distort
Edmundo Braverman's picture
by Edmundo Braverman ST
(Almost Human, 7517 Points) on 9/10/10 at 5:19am
shortselling2.jpg
Short sellers get a bad rep when they really shouldn't. I think it's because 90% of the population doesn't understand how you can sell something you don't own, or how you can make money by the value of something dropping. The way I used to explain it to people is that there is only one way to make money in the market: buy low and sell high. You just don't always have to do it in that order.
So the Short and Distort is merely the Pump and Dump in reverse. Rather than buying a stock and spreading a bunch of bullshit rumors about how great it is, guys who short and distort sell the stock first and then spread a bunch of bullshit rumors about how lousy it is. More often than not, the guys who run these scams are doing it on the very same stocks. Let's face it, it's hard to find more of a sure thing to short than a stock that has just been pumped and is primed for the dump.
THE BIG MONEY
The main difference between the Pump and Dump and the Short and Distort is the caliber of players involved. With the exception of professional outfits like the one I described yesterday, most Pump and Dumpers are nitwits looking for people even dumber than they are. That's simply not the case with predatory short sellers.
Short selling requires a level of capital and sophistication well above those who manipulate stocks to the long side. Because short selling is such a mystery to so many (including regulators), a well-timed short can hide a multitude of sins. And anyone who's been trading longer than two hours will tell you that stocks go down with a lot more volume and velocity than they go up.
Pump and dumpers are a short seller's best friends. Once you identify a deal that is being manipulated higher, it's a simple matter to short the stock and wait for the inevitable. But you can speed the process up if you let other traders know that a deal is garbage as well. By spreading negative rumors about a company, you can hasten the inevitable drop.
There is huge money in the Short and Distort, and some very big players do it as a matter of day to day business. Just ask Jim Cramer.
ROLL 212
Who could forget the relentless hammering Cramer took at the hands of The Daily Show's Jon Stewart? Back when Cramer was a hedgie, he was a big fan of the Short and Distort, and was dumb enough to describe what he did on a video with Aaron Trask. Roll 212:
The Daily Show With Jon Stewart Mon - Thurs 11p / 10c
Jim Cramer Extended Interview Pt. 2
www.thedailyshow.com
Daily Show Full Episodes Political Humor Tea Party
Some predatory short sellers aren't content with just rumor mongering to drive a stock lower, however. Some go to extraordinary lengths to make a stock collapse. One even went so far as to bribe a couple of FBI agents to open public investigations into companies he shorted.
THE MAD MAX OF WALL STREET
Those of us who knew Tony Elgindy back in the day would hardly describe him as a criminal mastermind. He was the guy you went to see if you were looking to get involved in a net-net deal, which is why I never had anything to do with him. Aside from an afternoon in 1994 when we shared an owner's box at the track, I don't ever think we ever said two words to each other. Little did I know at the time that he was headed for the short seller's Cooperstown.
Tony's got a couple years left on an 11-year jolt in the federal pen at Terminal Island, and CNBC did a special on him back in March called The Mad Max of Wall Street. The scam he set up is pretty amazing. He went from a nickel-and-dime penny stock pimp to a guy who ran a massive short selling operation. He changed his name to Tony Pacific and started selling subscriptions to his short selling picks for $600 a month, and he had a couple hundred subscribers.
His scam was simple. He'd find a company that looked like it was being pumped and then he'd jump on it, and tell all of his subscribers to do likewise. He'd put out some negative press about the company, and all the selling pressure would drive the stock into the ground and he'd clean up. In an of itself, there was nothing necessarily illegal about what he was doing. Hell, he was making $150,000 a month just selling his picks to his subscribers.
But that wasn't good enough for Tony. He used some the money he made to buy a couple of feds. How he came across a bent FBI agent I'll never know, but I guess if you search hard enough you'll eventually find what you're looking for. At first, he just bribed the guy to go into the FBI database and find companies that were under investigation. Tony would then short the stocks and reveal the investigation publicly, driving the price of the stocks down.
Soon that wasn't enough either, though, and Tony paid his FBI stooge to open investigations into companies Tony already shorted. No longer did he have to short bogus companies with tight floats. Now he could go after legitimate companies, short the stock, and cash in when the FBI or SEC opened an investigation into the company and the stock dropped as a result.
Of course, it all came crashing down. The two feds he had on the payroll did some time, and Tony tried to flee the country while he was out on bail, which earned him two more years on his nine-year sentence for fraud. But he's just one guy. There are many others like him out there. Here's the CNBC special on Tony's sordid tale, in case you want to check it out. It's pretty unbelievable stuff:
Guys, it's been a fun but somewhat exhausting week for me. I always feel like I need a shower after writing about stuff like this. I want to thank you for hanging in there with me, and I hope you've enjoyed the series. If you have any questions, as usual, leave them in the comments and I'll do my best to answer them. Have a great weekend!
http://www.wallstreetoasis.com/blog/scam-science-the-short-and-distort
Lots to digest and think about:
Given this background, the authorities naturally focused on Valentine’s small-time “pump and dumps”. They failed to recognize (or, at any rate, failed to acknowledge) his more destructive trading – the naked short selling that earned him (by several accounts) upwards of a billion dollars.
As a result, Valentine spent a brief time under house arrest and was then released. Valentine immediately went back to trading under an assumed name (according to some of his associates, who have spoken with Deep Capture).
Given that these associates say that Valentine was not just trading, but pummeling the markets with manipulative short selling at height of the financial crisis in 2008, maybe someone should arrest him again.
Maybe someone should arrest the other financial operators in his network, too. Because, as we will see in upcoming chapters, this network of financial operators (with ties to the Mafia, the Grand Jihad, and the agents of rogue states) was to a non-negligible degree responsible for the market cataclysm of 2008.
And the network continues to harbor the potential to do additional damage to the American economy.
To be continued…"
WFP Securities bites the dust
San Diego-based broker-dealer the latest to fold under weight of private-placement litigation; facing $14M in legal claims
By Bruce Kelly
June 3, 2011
http://www.investmentnews.com/article/20110603/FREE/110609976/-1/INDaily01&dailycount=1&issuedate=20110603
Another independent broker-dealer — and a substantial seller of allegedly fraudulent private placements — has gone belly up.
Facing more than $14 million in legal claims, WFP Securities of San Diego this week notified the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority Inc. that it was closing. The firm had 48 registered reps and advisers.(Click on the following link to see all independent B-Ds that have closed since 2010).
http://www.investmentnews.com/article/20110601/CHART02/110609993
According to court documents, the firm sold more than $27 million of private placements issued by Medical Capital Holdings Inc. and $6.8 million issued by Provident Royalties LLC. In 2009, the Securities and Exchange Commission charged both those companies with fraud.
WFP was one of 13 independent broker-dealers that was recently targeted in lawsuit filed by BNY Mellon over sales of MedCap notes, as reported last week by InvestmentNews. (To see the list of 13 B-Ds named in the suit, click here.)
WFP's BrokerCheck profile, however, had no reports of lawsuits or regulatory actions against the firm, but in an SEC filing last year, WFP said Finra was conducting an investigation of the firm related to investors' arbitration claims.
When reached Friday morning, the firm's president, John Schooler, said he did not have time to comment about the firm's closing.
Dozens of broker-dealers that sold notes from Medical Capital and Provident Royalties are struggling to survive or have folded, unable to bear the cost of lawsuits and investor complaints stemming from the failures of the alleged fraudulent investments.
Investors, along with some regulators, have charged that firms' lack of adequate due diligence on the products harmed clients, who have lost hundreds of millions of dollars in the deals. Broker-dealers, in turn, have laid the blame on the issuers.
http://www.investmentnews.com/article/20110603/FREE/110609976/-1/INDaily01&dailycount=1&issuedate=20110603
original post by scion
Why No Jail Time for Wall Street CEOs?
by David Weidner
Wednesday, June 1, 2011
NEW YORK (MarketWatch) — It's probably the most asked question to come out of the financial crisis: why aren't any Wall Street CEOs in jail?
It's asked on the message boards, over dinner, in the media, in Washington and in schools. Most people shrug and agree, someone important — Lloyd Blankfein at Goldman Sachs (NYSE: GS - News), Stan O'Neill, formerly of Merrill Lynch & Co., or Dick Fuld, the former CEO of Lehman Brothers — should go to jail, right?
A lot of us have tried to answer this question. Joe Nocera at the New York Times wrote in February that prosecutions were unlikely because "delusion is an ironclad defense." .
More recently, Roger Lowenstein, writing for Bloomberg BusinessWeek, concluded "risk-taking and stupidity aren't criminal." Lowenstein's argument won praise from the Times' Andrew Ross Sorkin who tweeted that Lowenstein was "probably right."
Finally, Bill Black, the University of Missouri at Kansas City law school professor, and one of clearest-thinking minds on culpability in the financial crisis, wrote a blistering takedown of both Lowenstein and Sorkin on The Big Picture blog by quoting their previous writing on Wall Street against them. In Sorkin's case:
"If the government spent half the time trying to ferret out fraud at major companies that it does tracking pump-and-dump schemes, we might have been able to stop the financial crisis, or at least we'd have a fighting chance at stopping the next one."
Taking down the 'Don'
The upshot of these assessments of legal culpability seems to be that while a successful prosecution may have long odds, it's probably worth doing. Indeed, the Financial Crisis Inquiry Commission and the Senate Investigations Subcommittee report on Wall Street, the Levin-Coburn report, both suggest further investigations are in order.
"It is possible for certain senior executives at major financial firms and banks to be held liable for the credit crisis," said Michael Chester, a partner at Skarzysnki Walsh & Black. "However, putting together a successful case will likely be much more problematic than most realize."
For one, regulators just haven't been keeping up, Chester said.
"Traditionally, these agencies have always amassed large amounts of information to use in subsequent criminal prosecutions. However, statistics show that these agencies have referred fewer financial cases to the U.S. Department of Justice in recent years."
Also, a ruling in the case against former Enron Chief Executive Jeff Skilling about the "honest services" statute now strictly applies to bribes and kickbacks, Chester said.
Moreover, the statute of limitations has run out on a lot of securities law claims, said Max Gardner, a consumer advocacy lawyer who's been working in the foreclosure space. He adds that it's difficult to pursue claims against securities sold by the banks these CEOs ran, because common-law fraud claims require a showing of intent.
"There's also the representations and warranties in the securitization documents themselves, including that there is good title to the mortgages and that they're not in default," he said. ""It's important to emphasize, however, that there could be suits against mortgage-backed securities sponsors, MBS servicers, and MBS trustees."
But those targets are admittedly below the executive suite for which we're aiming. It's hard, but not impossible, to believe those CEOs didn't know how reckless their standards had become on the mortgage and securitization front. Again, the Coburn-Levin report suggests there are some smoking guns that could link high-level executives who testified that they just didn't know what was happening.
Even if there was evidence enough to build a case, it probably wouldn't satisfy us.
"For those who sold financial products that misrepresented their credit worthiness, how far up the chain do you want to go?" asked Brian Greenberg, an accountant and investor based in Marlton, N.J. "Do you want to take down the 'Don'?
"In that case start with the Federal Reserve that made credit plentiful and cheap without any regard to creditworthiness of the buyer. If their excessive policy of pushing cheap money did not exist, then Wall Street would not have been able to push the 'junk' to the kids — er, public."
Greenberg makes a fair point. There's a lot of blame to go around.
It's the ability to mete out punishment that has its limits.
David Weidner covers Wall Street for MarketWatch.
___
http://finance.yahoo.com/banking-budgeting/article/112840/jail-ceos-marketwatch?mod=bb-budgeting&sec=topStories&pos=5&asset=&ccode=
An interesting post for the weekend from another board:
http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=63876264
When the deal is done it is going to cause a transfer of wealth and those who will be giving that wealth up are very concerned and well they should be. Go NMGL!!!
Quite a group that Bauman group! Go FFGO!!!
Texan77: Thanks for sharing. My Dad had a saying that tigers don't change their stripes. The bloodline continues. Go FFGO!!!
SEC Adds Insider Trading Charge Vs FDA Chemist
by The Associated Press
WASHINGTON June 2, 2011, 08:41 pm ET
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=136902178
Federal regulators on Thursday expanded their civil insider-trading charges against a chemist with the Food and Drug Administration accused of using confidential FDA information on pending drug approvals to profit from trades of drug companies' stock.
Cheng Yi Liang is facing both civil and criminal charges of running an insider trading scheme starting in November 2007. He and his son were arrested in March on charges including securities fraud and wire fraud.
The Securities and Exchange Commission said Thursday it filed a revised civil lawsuit against Liang, alleging he illegally traded in advance of a public announcement on FDA approval of XenoPort Inc.'s Horizant. That was the 28th announcement the SEC says Liang traded ahead of, in addition to the 27 cited in the agency's suit filed in federal court in Greenbelt, Md., on March 29.
The agency's revised suit "shows Liang had one more illegal trade in the pipeline when we charged him," SEC spokesman John Nester said in a statement. "That trade was not expected to pay off until after we put a stop to his fraudulent scheme."
Horizant was developed to treat restless leg syndrome. Liang made more than $126,000 in profits on XenoPort's stock, the SEC said. He is accused of making a total $3.6 million in the trading scheme.
Liang's lawyer, Andrew Carter, didn't immediately return a telephone call seeking comment Thursday.
The SEC is seeking unspecified restitution and fines against Liang.
Liang looked up the status of the FDA's review of Horizant on a confidential database at least 52 times between Jan. 6 and March 24, the SEC said. He bought 43,000 shares of XenoPort in accounts in other people's names in February and March.
The announcement of the approval of Horizant came on April 6, about a week after Liang was charged by the SEC and federal prosecutors. It boosted the price of XenoPort stock by 56 percent, according to the SEC.
The new SEC complaint adds an eighth brokerage account to those it says Liang used to avoid getting caught. That one was in the name of his father, the agency said.
The Wall Street Journal reported Thursday that the government has expanded its investigation of insider trading at the FDA to cover other government employees besides Liang. The Journal cited unidentified people familiar with the matter.
Nester declined to comment on the report.
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=136902178
original post by scion
SevenTenEleven: lol Good question.
kruy: Your logic does not make sense to me. I have received many offers in the U.S mails that I have not availed myself of and because I chose not to I would not expect that I am owed anything. Go BCIT!!!
The only people who deserve to know are those that did donate imho and when the time is right all will know. Go BCIT!!!
As a shareholder who has donated to the fund my expectations are that the funds will be used as stated. I do find it interesting that some folks who obviously have not contributed would be so concerned as to what the funds were being used to do. Those who committed criminal acts against BCIT are locked in with no way to escape. Yes, those who purchased those non existant shares have their funds tied up as well but for us it is like a long term CD that sooner or later will pay us a nice return. For the criminals it is a huge liability hanging over their heads that could bankrupt them or worse cause them to go to jail. Go BCIT!!!
Rep. Paul to Fed: Tell Us Everything, or Else
By Peter Barnes
Published June 01, 2011
| FOXBusiness
Reuters
The chairman of the House subcommittee that oversees the Federal Reserve demanded Tuesday that the Fed fully disclose details of billions -- perhaps trillions -- in secret emergency loans it made to almost every major bank in the U.S. and overseas during the financial crisis or face a congressional subpoena for the information.
In an interview with Fox Business, Rep. Ron Paul (R-Texas), chairman of the House Financial Services subcommittee on domestic monetary policy, said he wants to know “how much, when, where and why” from Fed officials when they testify about the loans at a subcommittee hearing Wednesday.
“We’re going to get to the bottom of what the Fed did during the big bailout a couple of years ago,” Paul said. “We have some precise questions. I imagine we won’t get all of them answered tomorrow because they’ll do a little bit of stonewalling, I’m sure.”
“If they don’t answer, they’ll hear from us,” he said. “We can use the subpoena power and say, ‘Look, you have to bring us the records.’ ”
The big loans started in 2007 and were disclosed in April under Freedom of Information Act requests by FOX Business and Bloomberg News after a two-year legal battle with the Fed and banks by the news organizations.
The loans came through the Fed's nearly 100-year-old confidential emergency lending program called the "discount window," in which the central bank provides funds to banks as the financial system's "lender of last resort" when firms can't borrow from each other or elsewhere.
More than 25,000 pages of previously-secret Fed discount window reports indicated most of the loans went to help many large U.S. banks, including Citigroup, Bank of America and JPMorgan Chase (JPM: 41.96, -1.28, -2.96%), as well as many regional and community banks. They were short-term loans of one to 90 days.
But the day such loans peaked in October 2008 at $111 billion, records show about half the total went to two big European banks -- Belgium's Dexia and Ireland's Depfa -- as one-day overnight loans. Many more familiar foreign banks, from Barclays in Great Britain to Deutsche Bank (DB: 41.05, -0.36, -0.88%) in Germany, borrowed as well.
“The most astounding thing we see in these documents is so much of it went to foreign banks—the whole system was bailing out foreign banks,” Paul said. “It’s a bit shocking on how big a deal this is and how much money was involved…The shenanigans are very international.”
Paul, a longtime Fed critic and a 2012 Republican presidential candidate, said he would wait until he knows more about the loans before he considers proposing any new legislation to expand audits of Fed operations or to force greater Fed disclosure about such lending--or even future limits on it.
“It’s ripe for reform, but I think transparency is the first step,” he said. “The (Fed’s responses to) written questions are going to be very important, the follow up’s going to be very important, so this is really just the beginning.”
In announcing the hearing, the Financial Services Committee suggested it was pushing the Fed for more voluntary disclosure about discount window operations. “The hearing will also explore how the Fed plans to disclose such information in the future,” it said.
Fed loans to foreign bank loans through the discount window are legal under U.S. law because the banks operate U.S. branches regulated by the Fed and make U.S. loans.
In April, the Fed declined to comment on the documents it released. But its records show the emergency loans were collateralized in full and have since been repaid.
Until April, details of discount window lending for all banks, foreign and domestic, had been private because the Fed and banks worried that naming firms that borrow for emergencies could scare customers, stigmatize banks, cause bank "runs" and hurt the financial system.
Under financial reform legislation Congress approved in 2009, the Fed disclosed details of $3.3 trillion in emergency lending through more than half-a-dozen temporary rescue programs it has since ended. The legislation also requires the Fed to now disclose discount window loans after two years.
It was unclear from the FOIA documents how much discount window lending totaled during the financial crisis. The Fed released copies of largely-unedited reports listing tens of thousands of individual transactions. Paul said the staff of his subcommittee had not totaled the loans itself in part because of the “complexity of it all.”
A Fed spokesperson said that the central bank welcomed the opportunity to discuss how the Fed informs lawmakers and the public about its policies and actions and that it releases "significant, detailed" information about its operations on a regular basis. The spokesperson said the Fed wants to promote understanding of how it fosters financial and economic stability and to facilitate an evaluation of its actions while also preserving the ability to fulfill its Congressionally-mandated responsibilities.
Scott Alvarez, the Fed’s general counsel, and Thomas Baxter, general counsel of the Federal Reserve Bank of New York, are scheduled to testify at Wednesday’s hearing, which is titled “Federal Reserve Lending Disclosure: FOIA, Dodd-Frank, and the Data Dump.”
In a May 25th statement announcing the hearing, the chairman of the Financial Services Committee, Rep. Spencer Bachus (R-Ala.), said, “Many of the actions taken by the government in response to the financial crisis took place behind closed doors with little, if any, information provided to the public. These actions demonstrated to many of us that the Federal Reserve was in need of transparency and accountability. Now that the Fed has released information on its actions during the financial crisis, it is important for the Committee to examine the disclosures by the Federal Reserve and ensure taxpayers are protected. This subcommittee hearing is a step towards ensuring transparency and accountability at the Federal Reserve.”
Read more:http://www.foxbusiness.com/industries/2011/05/31/rep-paul-fed-tell/
SevenTenEleven: That is going to put the Fed on the hook for a lot of them imho because with the ones I mentioned and the others that will be going bankrupt as a result of their corrupt practices it will be a nightmare for them. Isn't it sad that that is what it make take to clean up our markets and force the regulators to do what they should have been doing 15 or more years ago? Who gets the ultimate shaft? The taxpayer. Lets hope that we see a whole bunch of those 5000 supoenas issued in the next few weeks.
jfburk: Lots of us will be on that same bus with you. I look at this as a stock to pass on to my children's children. Go SRSR!!!
Well think about it and see who you come up with. I wonder if FINRA or the SEC would answer that question?
Question for the board: What happens in a case where say a Leaman or a Refco had a large naked short position in a company that is able to force shorts to cover? Who is responsible for those liabilities if the company that owned them has gone bankrupt? The DTCC?
BillyJack: I hope both those companies are able to rid themselves of the manipulation they have been battling for years.
Many many eyes are watching!
Tom: Wouldn't you agree that management has a fiduciary responsibility to preserve and protect the assets of the company?
I believe that is exactly what they are doing at this point because of the corruption presnt in our markets at the moment?
Have you been reading what Jeff Mitchell has been writing?
If not, perhaps you should as I believe it will provide new insight and understanding as to why things are as they are.
Go FFGO!!!
BillyJack: Congrats to you and the other longs who have been waiting for years for this to happen. Hopefully both companies will be able to rid themselves of the naked shorts.
molson_ice1: Never assume. I hope you read and think about what I stated in my previous post, then go and read the materials I suggested and then do whatever is within your power to try and put a stop to financial terrorism. Go FFGO!!!
I wonder how long it is going to take for the supoenas to be issued for lying to Congress or will the DOJ just file criminal charges? No wonder some of the GS execs are now packing according to some. It sure will be nice to see some justice.
Announcement of the ex date will be an awesome day for the longs and a nighmare date for some. Bring it on! Go FFGO!!!
June 1, 2011, 5:29 PM ET.Goldman Accused of Withholding Lehman Text By Joseph Checkler Of DOW JONES DAILY BANKRUPTCY REVIEW
Lehman Brothers is accusing Goldman Sachs of intentionally delaying turning over emails in a bankruptcy probe of whether a secret Wall Street campaign helped short sellers profit at Lehman’s expense from the investment bank’s implosion.
Getty ImagesIn a Tuesday filing with the U.S. Bankruptcy Court in Manhattan, Lehman said that despite agreeing last month to search for certain terms in emails from 37 proprietary trading-desk custodians, Goldman has only searched 11 custodians’ messages.
“Goldman Sachs is moving at a glacial pace in an effort to run out the statute of limitations without producing the requested documents,” Lehman said in its filing. Lehman is asking Judge James Peck to force Goldman to search the other 26 custodians’ inboxes within two weeks.
Goldman declined to comment.
Lehman is probing what it calls a Wall Street-wide campaign against the investment bank in the months ahead of its September 2008 collapse that garnered profits for naked short sellers, or investors that bet against a company’s stock without physically locating the shares. The Securities and Exchange Commission issued strict regulations against naked-shorting during the financial crisis, but regulators have typically had a difficult time enforcing those rules.
In the months and days before Lehman collapsed in September 2008, at the height of the financial crisis, the bank–particularly then-Chairman and Chief Executive Dick Fuld–repeatedly blamed much of the plunge in Lehman’s stock price on pressure created by rumors and short selling.
While the collapse of the bank has since been blamed much more on the diminished value of its assets, Lehman is still trying to assess how much of the losses can be attributed to the spreading of rumors.
Lehman initially subpoenaed Goldman last April, and while Goldman recently wavered over how many of the custodians’ emails it would search, the bank agreed last month that it would search terms on all 37 Lehman had named.
In its Tuesday court filing, Lehman said Goldman was also slow in providing organizational charts that would help Lehman in identifying the custodians that were most relevant. Lehman said its request is limited to a very specific set of terms used in emails over a four-month period.
“Given its enormous wealth and resources, Goldman Sachs clearly is not burdened by undertaking this modest production,” Lehman said in its filing. A hearing on the matter is set for June 15.
Lehman’s collapse in September 2008 marked the largest U.S. bankruptcy case ever filed. Since then, a team of hundreds of bankruptcy professionals under the direction of restructuring firm Alvarez & Marsal has managed Lehman’s assets–which include real-estate holdings, corporate debt and derivatives–for the benefit of creditors.
Lehman has filed an updated plan to distribute its assets, as have two other parties–one by a group of bondholders led by hedge-fund manager Paulson & Co.–and one by a group of creditors of Lehman’s so-called non-operating subsidiaries, led by Goldman and distressed investment manager Silver Point Capital LP.
Lehman estimated earlier this year that it will likely have $322 billion in allowed claims against the estate, with $272 billion from the parent company and about $50 billion from its various subsidiaries. The bank increased creditors’ expected net recovery by $2.6 billion from the $57.5 billion it estimated in a September court presentation.
–Liz Moyer contributed to this post.
http://blogs.wsj.com/deals/2011/06/01/goldman-accused-of-withholding-lehman-emails/?mod=yahoo_hs
Thanks for posting the current info. Hopefully something good will come from the meetings.
op9171787: We are moving forward at the speed of government. In fairness though a huge investigation of the hedge funds is underway, in fact SAC got quite a bit of press today. Hang in.
Go BCIT!!!
BTW hope you are keeping up with the chapters as they are published at deepcapture.com. Lots of interesting folks being mentioned.
Welcome stock sheriff to the FFGO board. Most longs love to see new faces arrive here. We take it as an omen of things to come.
Go FFGO!!!
fourkids_9 pets. They sold their soul along with any semblance of integrity they may one have had. I believe we will soon have a lot of "brilliant morons" filling our prisons. Sad but amazing to me they actually believed they could commit crimes repeatedly and get away with it forever.