Here comes the next phase.LOL

Do you not understand. If you have shares in your account, (street name, IOU, whatever) then the LEGAL shares have ben delivered. No one is on the hook for anything. The SHARES HAVE SETTLED.

All of these nonsensical arguments trying to provide some silly avenue to hide a short scenario have been dealt with ad nauseum.

That IOU nonsense was put to bed months ago. The legal shares settled into your account when the transaction cleared. The IOU (if it ever existed) lasted for no more than the time it took from the purchase until the shares settled.

All settled shares are legal. All IOU's are covered when the shares settle. Deal with it.

What are you talking about?

The current price is Ask (.0001) and Bid (no bid)

The expected results of a SUCCESSFUL P&D would be an Ask > .0001 and a bid of .0001.

Do you not see the difference?

Do you understand that one set of numbers is higher than the other?

Also no one said anything about a few shares. In fact the number of shares that would be available to a .0001 bid would be huge, several billion I expect. The down side is the size of the pump and dump could never absorb that many and the bid wouldn't last very long.

I hope this clarifies things for you.

No effect whatsoever.

To start with there are no MORE shares in the OS due to the Gendarme transactions. The 2.1 Billion shares entered the OS the day that Newton sold (transacted) them to Gendarme. Once in the OS they diluted the pps instantly.

Registering the shares would have zero effect on the OS as the shares were in the OS before the registration or lack thereof ever came into question.

Even $50,000 would have been worth a billion discounted shares(50% discount) . Do you seriously contend that controlling interest in the company (According to the faithful the OS is around 377 miliion) in exchange for a IR report?

So that's a no. You don't have the name and NUMBER of the person you spoke to.

Have to wonder how you could have spoken to him without having his number. Want to rephrase that claim?

Why wouldn't anyone be OK with the CEO giving away controlling interest in the company in exchange for an IR report?

You should read the DD provided by Johnnofiber.

Yes, more than one.



Pay attention.

Here is a quote from the Gendarme web site that describes their activity.



Now if you go to ANOTHER web site for ANOTHER totally independent company.
http://www.manhattancapitalcorp.com/

You will see the following in the Capital Solutions page.



Coincidence?

I can't wait to hear your analysis. LOL

Additionally, if you do a little DD on all the various associates that seem to be connected to these companies (including some of those named with RCCH on the SEC complaint), you might find it interesting hom wany times the names Essman and Lux show up.

Have you got any thoughts on that 'coincidence' also? LOL



I'm glad you like them.

As soon as this embarrassing Pump and Dump gets on track.

Better ask them.

All-right children time for today's lesson.

We know that Newton sold billions of shares at a discount. We know that gendarme skated on very thin ice selling those shares without registering them. What we need to figure out is WHY.

Why would anyone be interested in risking legal troubles by selling unregistered shares?

What is the motive?

Clearly all Gendarme had to do to sell the shares legally was register them with the SEC. They were unrestricted shares and once the registration was done they could be sold at will. Why not do it that way?

On the other hand why would Newton sell his shares at a discount to Gendarme when all he had to do was register them and sell them at full price on the market. Why not do it that way?

Why was 'registration' such a problem? Who had any motive to avoid registration? Gendarme?........ or Newton?

The most obvious reason to avoid registration is that the share sale becomes instantly public knowledge. No point in gagging the transfer agent to hide the transactions if the sales are going to be registered anyway. Can't publicly dump shares into the market without having your loyal investors running away as fast as they can move.

So the only reason to not register the shares is to keep the sales from being made public and the only one who benefits from that is Newton.

Gendarme and the many many companies just like them offer a service to these fraudulent operators. They will circumvent the registration requirements for you in exchange for a significant share of the proceeds.

Gendarme didn't register the shares for only one reason. Newton wouldn't sell them unrestricted shares at a discount if they were going to make the sale public.

No one has any motive to keep the sale from the public except Newton.

Follow the money.

No you get the facts right, they are being challenged for not registering the shares they sold.

They could have sold them the very next day and the SEC would have been perfectly happy with the transaction as long as they registered the sale.

Read the complaint.

Seriously, are you just trying to confuse those who don't understand or do you not understand yourself?

The shares in question were NOT restricted.

From the SEC complaint:

13. Rule 504 of Regulation D of the Securities Act exempts from registration certain limited offerings and sales of securities that do not exceed $1,000,000.

The complaint HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH RESTRICTIONS, it has to do with 'registration'. Do you understand the difference?

Newton was selling unrestricted shares to Gendarme, period. He was doing it because he was not allowed to sell them to the public without registering the sale. Gendarme sold them to the public without registering them based on an opinion written by their lawyer. That opinion is what is in dispute.

No forgery, no illegal stocks, the only thing that is potentially illegal is the sale itself and ONLY because the SEC wasn't informed of the sale so that they could keep track of unreporting companies.

There is no evidence or announcement in the SEC complaint or any other document that indicates that Newton wanted to put any restrictions on the shares he sold to Gendarme.

Your assumption that Gendarme made any effort to circumvent an 'agreement' with Newton is unfounded.

Newton clearly understood what was going on the entire time the transactions were ongoing. He sold them shares several times over a four month interval. They were selling the shares into the market the entire time. He knew, and by continuing to sell them shares, provided a tacit approval at least.

To suggest that they were violating any trust they had with Newton is an extraordinary claim that would require extraordinary proof. Not just an assumed fantasy.

To paraphrase the message.

The P&D is failing miserably, all those people telling the truth are getting in the way of the effort. We need to get them to stop.

I think that even you are buying into the hype to some extent.

No such thing has been decided. All that has occured so far is the SEC has filed a complaint that disputes a legal opinion. That is all. No one is accused of fraud.

The response from Gendarme indicates that they are quite comfortable with the expressed opinion of their attorney and intend to defend it.

At this point all that exists is an accusation over a disputed opinion. Throwing the 'fraud' word around merely adds to the excitement.

The complaint specifically adresses the legal description of whether or not Gendarme is or is not an underwriter. This case will boil down to the specific definition of underwriter as called out by the various state regulations.

Sure it is........ but this isn't forgery.

This is a legal opinion. It is quite legal for any lawyer to issue an opinion, even in written form to a TA.

The SEC has a problem with the 'opinion'.

They disagree with that opinion, that's all. If it goes to court the lawyer will have every right to defend the opinion and the SEC lawyers will be able to present their case.

When it is over, the opinion will be upheld or denied. If it is upheld the complaint will be denied, if the opinion is denied the SEC requested relief will be granted. Read the request for relief and you will see exactly what is at stake. Fines.

I think there is a very important point to be gleaned from that case that is specifically relevant to RCCH and the current complaint.

There is how the TA works. The 2.1 Billion shares were issued by the corporate issuer, the problem is with the reliance of the opinions of counsel.

The shares are legitimate, the shares were sold by Newton, they were issued on the instructions of RCCH. The opinion of counsel may be suspect but the shares were nevertheless issued on Newton's instructions.

And a very good question.

Answer, by taking several months to do it. Buying discounted shares in tranches, always staying below the 5% threshold, and by relying on Newton's assistance and support.

That all depends on how many more BILLIONS of discounted shares Newton sold to them in the first place.

As we know from the SEC complaint 2.1 Billion is the minimum.

You only have two categories?

How does that work with the traffic cop?

"Hey officer I was only going 40 in a 25 mile zone, it isn't a big deal I didn't murder anyone, why do you care?"

LOL

It is only a 'civil' action because that is all it is. Look at the SEC complaint it clearly states it is a civil complaint.

If you actually read what you wrote in that question you will see the problem.

"..isn't what RCCH alleges[color=red][/color] happened to them Fraud..."

Do you see the problem?

It isn't the SEC that suggests that any shares were sold illegally, they just claim that legal shares were sold unregistered. That isn't a big deal it is a violation of certain rules that leads to civil action, that's all.

Furthermore, if you look carefully you will see that RCCH hasn't alleged anything. All the hype and spin has been done by board posters.

No more from the company. Hasn't been for a while.

Don't know how many Gendarme has left though, or any of the other fences that Newton employed.

Also there are millions and millions of shares sitting on GTC sell orders waiting for someone to pick up so that trapped investors can get out. Many of those are available at fractional discounts to .0001.

So as long as the market is totally awash with .0001 shares there is absolutely no possibility of a bid.

The only way a bid will occur is if the P&D effort can drum up enough enthusiasm and demand that might overwhelm the enormous supply.

No more dilution until the AS is increased. It is maxed out now.

It is ONLY a civil complaint.

"Civil". No 'crime', no felony, no jail, nothing but a fine. No investor is going to benefit from this action.

The only possible effect on the company is if the SEC offers a deal to Gendarme's principles to turn states evidence in exchange for leniency.

Then the show could get very interesting. LOL

Same plan as always.

To provide as many obstacles as possible to those people trying to cheat honest investors out of their money.

Why did I know that would get your attention? LOL

Is this you from September 30 2009?

How is that going, how did you like "The Plan"?

Well that seems to be the 'defense'.

The spin seems to revolve around the possibility that Newton had no idea who he was dealing with although it does make him look like a complete idiot. According to the SEC the transactions between Newton and Gendarme took place over a span of several months. This time frame is clearly required in order to transact so many shares without exceeding the 5% reporting threshold. So it means that even though Gendarme had to keep selling the shares in order to come back to Newton for more and stay under the threshold, he was still completely oblivious to the sales and kept selling what he considered to be restricted shares. How anyone could be so foolish doesn't seem to be part of the spin, just that Newton is innocent of any wrong doing. Hard to pretend he is an innocent dupe under such circumstances but any other interpretation is so much worse. LOL

It's fact.

It is explained in a complaint from the SEC against Gendarme.

Is that good or bad?

Certainly the revelation that Gene was laundering billions of shares of stock through Gendarme and cutting them in for half was 'mind blowing'.

Are we going to hear what happened to the rest of the 10 billion shares dumped from the AS?

I actually can't think of anything more important once you understand their motives.

A normal company with a normal business would obviously never want to appear to care about what is being said about them on the street. They have to be above such considerations. However a company who's sole reason for existence is the extraction of revenues from the investment community through the sale of stock under completely fraudulent conditions is different. They are so dependent on the 'basher/naked short/cellar box' paradigm and so reliant on those who are attracted to such a scenario, that they have to keep those people happy.

Those kind of investors have no interest in real business or actual facts, they are hoping and expecting to make it big on the great 'Mother of All Short Squeezes'. They don't want fiancials, they don't want business PR's all they want is to force all those dirty little 'shorters' to have to cover.

The company has to play to their base, even though an intellect with the mental acuity of Daisy Duck can see through it, they can't and the company knows it.

Take it as the compliment it was intended to be. LOL

Here are a few questions regarding the last PR.

(I'm trying to keep a straght face but I'm failing miserably.)

First of all.....Research Department? They have a research department? A whole department populated by research scientists at corporate headquarters (LOL) or some kid with a laptop drinking a Pepsi at the local Micky Dee's where he can use the free WiFi?

Second of all..... Why is the Research Department looking at what is going on at ihub? Surely if there is any shenanigans going on there it should be the Legal Department. Or is the Research Department involved because Ihub is where all the market research is done? Is this an admission that the demographic most important to RCCH is NOT customers for it's goods and services (I know, I know, don't laugh.) but is the research and therefore company activity aimed specifically at pennymarket investors?

Given that the entire basis of the ongoing scams is the extraction of revenues from the investor base, my guess is the latter.

Cheers.

Here is the latest PR from the company.

RCCH - Latest Press Releases
RCC Holdings Research Division Recent Findings
Last Updated on Tuesday, 11 January 2011 20:21 Tuesday, 11 January 2011 20:17

The Research Division of RCCH recently followed up on information that was posted on InvestorsHub. Some of the findings led to further questions. Why are there an extraordinary number of bashers attacking RCCH when the stock has been cellar boxed?

Why are they posting 24/7 bashing multiple companies that are boxed, but remain in business, have not declared bankruptcy, and have future projections?

The worst offenders on investorsHub [Deleted to avoid violating ihub TOS]

The following alias names only show up occasionally:, , [Deleted to avoid violating ihub TOS}

Interestingly enough, there appears to be “Ring Leaders”, who posts warning about such topics as defamation, the RICO statues, or threatened to start legal action. Their alias names are: [Deleted to avoid violating ihub TOS]

A clear objective emerges when you follow the history of their postings. Bashing and manipulating, repeating their well-written message over multiple boards non-stop. For profit, one could only speculate.

Good catch johnny. Is there any wonder they increased the AS to 10 billion with all of these 'helpful' and oh so independent companies so willing to help them launder their shares?

I think you have gotten a little ahead of yourself.

Jail time? Labeled a Felon?

Are you serious? It is a simple CIVIL complaint. Possible fines are as far as civil penalties go. LOL

It seems quite obvious by now to even the most skeptical of the longs that Newton is in this up to his eyeballs.

Look at the appeal from Gendarme.

Can't pretend that Newton was duped anymore. He clearly knew exactly what was going on and must have approved. Case closed.
...

Johnny, What are the odds that the Lux and Essman entities named in that link regarding the fencing of discounted shares for a distincly shady company, are the same ones associated with this shady company and the fencing of its billions of shares?

http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=58020747

I had a lot more faith in the P&D crew than I should have. I have never seen such a poor effort.

I can't believe this is all they have and am hopeful that they have a few more arrows in the quiver, otherwise I am going to be forced to apologize for them for letting us all down.

Read this one fast, I doubt if it will last long.

Do you seriously think anyone is buying this?

The SEC complaint has been public for days now. If even a fraction of the people in the market believed the P&D spin, there would be some activity in anticipation of a covering rally. Yet nothing.

Clearly the effort is not having any effect on those who need to be affected if it's going to work.

The only people who seem inclined to buy into the unwieldy deconstruction of the text in the complaint are those who are already enmeshed in the trap and don't have anything to lose by grasping at straws.

Is this all there is to the effort?