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.
China / CBBD- restrictions on communications and media content - Will this result in a ban or restriction of sports entertainment on PPV?
1) Can't say "protest"; http://oneworldscam.com/?p=14056
2) http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2011/apr/14/china-time-travel-dramas
3) Shanghai. May 12. INTERFAX-CHINA - Although the number of IPTV subscribers is set to explode over the next few years, China's IPTV industry faces challenges if it is to maintain long-term development, delegates at the Asia Future TV 2008 conference in Shanghai said last Friday.
However, government restrictions, piracy, customer preconceptions and operator business models are all areas that could cause difficulties for the industry, said Li Yiqing, vice general manager of Huashu Digital Television Co. Ltd., an IPTV operator in Zhejiang Province.
"The government's restrictions on TV program content indicate that there will never be eye-catching programs on TV," she said. "Many good foreign TV dramas will not be introduced and some controversial content that people are interested in will not be allowed to be shown. If there is no good content, why should people pay to watch TV?"
"As for piracy, Chinese people as well as foreigners in China enjoy the country's piracy market. The programs on IPTV will never defeat pirated products in range and price," Li said.
"The third problem is that Chinese TV viewers have a deeply-rooted conception that all TV programs should be free, as the Chinese government has always defined TV as a free social service," she said.
"The fourth problem is that many IPTV operators are not conducting their businesses properly and whole-heartedly," she said. "Operators set up IPTV services as they fear being left behind. However, they don't analyze their consumers."
It's not like CCME is Loeb's entire book of business. Far from it, Loeb & Loeb that represents many RTOs and other companies with operations in China too. Each such company has its own set of facts. Some of these may ultimately prove to be frauds while others may not; some may seek relisting or dual listing in HK while others may not. Some may have been victimized by wrongful bear attacks engaged in regulatory arbitrage, while others may be in the receiving end of accurate exposes. There's also a lot of room for overlap between fabrication and accuracy in any one series of hitpieces/exposes of each respective company. In other words, nothing Nussbaum wrote necessarily applies to CCME more or less than it would to any other company Loeb represents, and his words may even reflect what he perceives to be happening in companies Loeb does not represent at all. It's therefore unreasonable to conclude that what Nussbaum wrote reveals the behind the scenes at CCME any more or less than had Nussbaum never written the statement in the first place.
-Andrew
Updated Institutional Holdings in size order for 3/31/11 Snapshot:
Total Shares Out Standing (millions): 16
Institutional Ownership: 25%
Price (as of 5/20/2011) 5.12
Ownership Analysis # Of Holders Shares
Total Shares Held: 19 4,118,354
New Positions: 5 117,448
Increased Positions: 13 871,245
Decreased Positions: 3 75,537
Holders With Activity: 16 946,782
Sold Out Positions: 1 937
KNOTT DAVID M 3/31/2011 1,350,000 0 0.00% $6,912
CLEAR HARBOR ASSET M... 3/31/2011 693,845 276,038 66.07% $3,552
MARXE AUSTIN W & GRE... 3/31/2011 670,000 0 0.00% $3,430
KEANE CAPITAL MANGEM... 3/31/2011 414,287 320,000 339.39% $2,121
PRESCOTT GROUP CAPIT... 3/31/2011 322,000 (63,000) (16.36%) $1,649
STRAUS CAPITAL MANAG... 3/31/2011 190,000 70,000 58.33% $973
BAKER AVENUE ASSET M... 3/31/2011 137,476 75,661 122.40% $704
CENTRAL SQUARE MANAG... 3/31/2011 75,850 240 0.32% $388
WHITEBOX ADVISORS LL... 3/31/2011 55,346 55,346 New $283
TORONTO DOMINION BAN... 3/31/2011 54,000 5,600 11.57% $276
DIKER MANAGEMENT LLC 3/31/2011 48,400 (11,600) (19.33%) $248
SOUNDPOST PARTNERS, ... 3/31/2011 35,000 35,000 New $179
INVESCO LTD. 3/31/2011 27,025 4,025 17.50% $138
OXFORD ASSET MANAGEM... 3/31/2011 16,023 2,233 16.19% $82
CALIFORNIA PUBLIC EM... 3/31/2011 10,700 10,700 New $55
RENAISSANCE TECHNOLO... 3/31/2011 10,501 10,501 New $54
DEUTSCHE BANK AG\ 3/31/2011 5,901 5,901 New $30
ROYAL BANK OF CANADA... 3/31/2011 2,000 0 0.00% $10
UBS AG 3/31/2011 0 (937) Sold Out $0
Posted here fore your convenience.
Source: http://www.nasdaq.com/asp/holdings.asp?symbol=CCCL&symbol=CCME&selected=CCCL&FormType=Institutional
-Andrew
CBBD - 10-Q: http://yahoo.brand.edgar-online.com/DisplayFiling.aspx?dcn=0001140361-11-029292
Can a PPV-experienced American management build a profitable PPV (Pay Per View) business in China while benefitting shareholders? We shall see over many years.
(I sold at 8.5 cents about 7 sessions ago). Trading at .12 now. There is a 1:200 outstanding reverse split approved by the Board to be potentially acted upon by management over the next 18 months, so I classify this as an exception likely seeking to uplist at share price over 4. (This RS creates downward pressure too which is part of why I sold).
-Andrew
Such irony.
I believe he is short LONG.
CAPEX further clarification.
http://finance.yahoo.com/news/China-Ceramics-Provides-prnews-2537794266.html?x=0&.v=1
MW could also be construed as appearing to hold out a job opportunity to the lady in that video. Of course with the missing two minutes, the unseen portion of the video (in addition to other facts) could be potentially be construed as containing context which might weight that much more heavily against MW's interests. Yeah, it could merely be to prevent her from revealing her identity. Did she say her name and address over and over for two straight minutes? Forget a stopwatch or metronome. I'd ask the Judge for latitude to play the Kentucky Derby so the length of time may be fully appreciated. Or two minutes of CSPAN 3-- an eternity.
-Andrew
I wrote that unsolicited because it's the truth, no harm can come from it, and I felt like it.
Besides, it's no fun to only tell you that Koufax is not the alter ego of the gentleman (Mr. Pierce) named some moments ago; it is fun to tell you what a great, trustworthy lawyer and person Koufax is.
So go on with whatever discussion knowing that much more detail. If you are uninterested or unimpressed in the details provided, that's up to you.
-Andrew
Let me put an end to this line of questioning by verifying for you that Koufax is not is not the gentlemen you referenced.
For the record, while Koufax is my friend, he is also an experienced, savvy attorney with a stellar reputation in the legal community for honesty and diligence, integrity, and for providing a wealth of seasoned legal analysis with emphasis on, among other things securities and business law, in a well respected long standing practice, to eminent corporate clients, individuals, businesses, and major players.
That's Koufax.
-Andrew
Thank you everyone for the warm remarks. I was happy to have served there here; frankly, I worked very hard to preserve the integrity of the conversation especially once the halt began and interest in the Board waned. One of my key contributions was suggesting that iboxes have an area reserved for red flags. Such is still found on this Board today.
To be clear, I was removed by someone other than a Board Moderator or Assistant Moderator, and such was within the rights of the iHub higher up who made that decision.
Since my removal, CCME is (after a nosedive) trading higher at the moment, so I'm happy for any effect my removal has had on your share price.
I presently have no shares in CCME. For those playing a bounce, have fun but be careful. Just as easily as there can be suspicion of a nice announcement of a favorable forensic audit showing 20%/40%/60% cash, etc. (which might make these prices attractive), there can also be a resignation of DLA Piper for noncooperation as has happened in other similar cases too. I'm not making a call one way or the other, just saying what you all already know and to please be careful/prudent no matter how you trade this.
I'll be around and check in from time to time.
Again thanks for the nice remarks.
-Andrew
Rato: Thanks for talking about commodities. I've been 1/3 invested in oil/energy stocks for many years and have not gone directly in on commodity contracts themselves. Something to consider.
Another advantage of commodities is that they are not subject to filing failures, failed audits, regulatory arbitrage, halts or corruption at a China RTO level (other than fixing by an OPEC or policy change by the next powerholder in the House of Saud; major sellouts i.e. recent silver).
-Andrew
Rjeezy007, that's a very good item to add to the list. -Andrew
I refer you Mary to the answer given some moments ago.
-Andrew
Mary: Please direct me to the preexisting CCME options that expire in May, 2011, that you wrote about so eloquently.
-Andrew
You must have missed my messages asking many questions about CCME, my expressions of disdain for management, and my messages raising major concerns about CCME as an investment. What upsets you is that I also raised such questions about shorts and the motivations of those behind various hitpieces. Moreover I have worked tirelessly to ensure politely expressed opinions, both bullish and bearish, are welcome and remain posted. The record speaks for itself as does yours.
-Andrew
Mary, please provide a link to May 2011 options on CCME. There are none. Game over Mary.
Hi Mary. You are viewing facts in hindsight.
You were asking us to speculate on what went on in CEO Zheng Cheng's mind at the time of the original halt when DTT resigned but shareholders had not yet been so inforned. One perspective was that the CEO wanted to punish shorts. The argument for punishing putholders back on March 11, 2011 might go that perhaps the CEO thought halting would buy him time to show positive performance that would drive the price up or prevent such a large drop in CCME price. Had the CEO done this, it could have reduced gains for putholders or even caused a squeeze. The CEO did not. Back in March, for all we know, the CEO may have subjectively thought that he could. The rest is history as are my CCME shares when the CEO did not give any news other than delisting at the open.
My thesis throughout the halt was that the CEO would issue press that would catalyze buying. (I also hoped we'd have some indication from DLA Piper/ PWC/Independent Directors before trading would have resumed. The CEO did not issue any statement that would catalyze and the stock began trading again before we got any indications from the PWC investigation, i.e. a resignation due to uncooperation or extensive period without resignation. That's when it became time for me to sell.
-Andrew
"CCME: Filling in the Blanks" - Bullmarkets
Why did Marco Kung (Former Chair of the Audit Committee resign April 14, 2011, and why did CEO Zheng Cheng refuse to allow DTT to check bank statements at the head bank office instead of local branches? This brazen resistance to an honest audit by Marco Kung-- who is also the Wuyi Pharma Financial Controller-- may explain circumstances under which DTT, the CFO, and an Independent Director resigned.
Allegedly, CCME and Wuyi share the same address and phone number. Coincidence or by design? Let's ask Wuyi Pharma's auditor-- also Deloitte. Wuyi did declare a special dividend on March 29 sending shares up 15%. What if CCME does the same? What if that dividend was actually an allocation of siphoned and transferred CCME revenue? Or was the money used to give the Lins cash to then repay loans from CCME?
The March 31, 2011, 8-K/A clarifies that, prior to its resignation, "DTT raised the following issues (some of which may be considered to be disagreements) encountered during the audit, including: 1) issues related to the authenticity of bank statements; 2) a loss of confidence in bank confirmation procedures carried out under circumstances which DTT believed to be suspicious; 3) issues concerning the validity of certain advertising agents/ 4) customers and 5) bus operators (including with respect to certain of the 6) Company's top ten customers); 7) concerns over possible undisclosed bank accounts and 8) bank loans; 9) information on file with the State Administration of Industry and Commerce as to certain subsidiaries appearing to be inconsistent with comparable financial information provided to DTT; 10) the verification of the validity of a sampling of tax invoices issued in connection with certain large transactions; 11) the verification of certain subsidiary tax payments with the local office of the State Administration of Taxation; 12) the verification of salary payments made in cash directly to employee bank accounts; 13) the verification of the production process for advertising programs; and 14) the potential double counting of a certain number of buses. As a result, DTT had requested that the bank confirmation process be re-done at the banks' head office and that the issues described above be addressed by an independent forensic investigation." (numbers added)
There are now more questions than a game of Clue. Was it Cheng, in 2009, by his signature? Was it Jacky, on Form 4, with someone else's money? Was it Deloitte, in 2009, with the signoff? Was it Dorothy, in the Boardroom, with the resignation? Was it Starr, through its investment, promoting Cheng? Was it Cheng, at the podium, with no eye contact? Could it be Cheng, everywhere, with DSM-IV-TR 301.81? Did Zeng Cheng direct a major fraud on investors? Is Zheng a brazen criminal? Will shareholders get some class action justice? Or is management an innocent a victim of FUD on steroids and a former auditor under the influence of outsiders?
What would forensic audit have revealed? Will there ever be one with results released?
Did DTT ever even say cash was missing? Did DTT verify revenue? Are all left to make assumptions for lack of detail? What did DTT find? What did Deloitte miss? How much? Who knows? Why resign? Coincidence or by design? Bribes? Incompetence? Laziness? Pressure? Do honest mistakes happen, auditing one out of every four Chinese media companies? Were the 2009 CTR reports accurate and did Deloitte so verify?
Didn't Starr have the right to conduct periodic audits? How will CCME, Jacky Wai Kei Lam, Cheng Zheng, and DTT HK respond to lawsuit by CV Starr? What will come of Starr's separately filed arbitration? Was Starr due diligence ever leaked to ensnare retail investors?
How about when Ping checked cash? Or did Ping just cash her check? Or was Global Hunter hoodwinked -- just like Ping? Did Northland "verify" cash too, or was Darren tricked twice?
There were 8,069,024 shares short as of March 15, 2010. Was this just a lucky guess by shorts, put-holders, and hedge funds? Really? Were there no trades on material non-public information? Possible leakers could include executives, Deloitte, and Starr. Maybe no leaks.
An inside job? Perhaps. What about more names behind the scenes?
How could Zhuofeng Zheng (Financial Controller since 2003) have missed all signs of cash irregularities. Where did CFO Jacky Lam get the $1,500,000 to buy 100,000 shares given only a paltry $79K/year salary? Cosmetic setup or genuine purchase? What about Yingshou Huang, Director, who signed the 2009 audit? Also, what role, if any, did Independent Director George Ronghong Zhou play?
What, if anything, did the Lin brothers know? Why would Bright Elite sell a profitable CCME? Are there now 1000 questions or questions for 1000? Why also did Starr Cayman II buy the same? Did CEO Zheng offload offshore without SEC filing? If so could shareholders vote Zheng out? Any truth to what "the Fuzhou gov't friend "told WCTBILLS that: "the company is a fraud, controlled by the Lin brothers..." but "not sure how big"?
What about "W.C. T-Bills", our or is he the quasi- Mr. Roarke, or is he of our adventure? the Mr. Flint of our adventure? Shareholder Hero, Sleuth, MK/ML, MSS, an International Man of Mystery-- or do some suspect more? Or was "WCTBILLS" just a helpful shareholder, an American living in Shanghai, who also rides buses? WCT's recent blog is highly critical of management and Marco Kung for failing to provide auditors access to resolve issues at the banks' head office.
What became of 900,000 unaccounted earnout shares in 2009? Were these used to fund books kept by Cheng behind Jacky's back? Or were future earnout shares promised in exchange for cash infusions which topped off already solid earnings to ensure the company stated enough revenue to trigger these earnouts? (self-dealing)
All theories welcomed.
Note: The above was on the CCME Board iBox. Now that the CCME security is trading again, I'm preserving this in the form of the above post.
-Andrew
Rabitmania:
Some of what you said is not fair or accurate. I bought much but not nearly all of my former CCME position in light of the final report from Global Hunter.
I did not say much of what you wrote.
My statements speak for themselves. You can speak for yourself.
-Andrew
Mary, you should break your questions down into smaller individualized questions for easy answering.
We know no more about CCME today than a week ago except that the stock is trading and the CEO put out no news other than acknowledging the delisting over that timeframe.
I know I sold all my shares today.
-Andrew
Once again, the world watched CCME. (shout out to Brrrp)
CCME was the most read iHub Board today with over 300,000 views:
1 China MediaExpress Holdings, Inc. (CCME) 306,505
Source: http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/most_read.aspx
(this data refreshes daily)
-Andrew
Reader10Q: I know in hindsight that if CCME read its mail, CCME had that much more time to prepare and so I'm all the more distraught that management did nothing in that extra time afforded to prepare a release to support their stock. CCME management is that much more disgraceful.
At the time I and others wrote CCME's counsel, that 8k was not filed. For all I know, they opened their mail because of the e-mail notices sent.
(Again, I am confident I was not the first to inform CCME's counsel-- there probably was a phone call if not an e-mail as a courtesy identifying the decision, I'd suspect-- but when CCME appears to not care one iota about shareholder concerns, a proactive approach on my part is better than inaction when the stock is opening the next day and no one has said one word about it to the shareholders).
-Andrew
Maybe the CEO felt he could punish the put holders by being halted at expiration time. This is a CEO with a narcissistic personality disorder. Such people may feel invincible. He also had no regard for longs at all.
He may also be short himself. What better way to ensure a low price? A halt without meaningful positive news at resumption.
-Andrew
The CCME legal team received notice yesterday at or about 5PM. At least I can say for sure that I e-mailed two lawyers at Loeb and Loeb at or about that time (one of which was Mr. Nussbaum); I cc'd two shareholders and CCME's PR address too. Another shareholder/lawyer sent his own e-mail to these Loeb attorneys and CCME; still another shareholder/CPA also sent his own e-mail to these Loeb attorneys, ccing CCME as well.
The sum and substance of my e-mail was:
"Dear CCME Counsel:
If you were not aware, CCME (China MediaExpress Holdings, Inc.) lists as opening Pink tomorrow 5/19/11:
05/18/2011 13:05:25|A||CCME||China MediaExpress Holdings, Inc. Common Stock|05/19/2011|From Q (CCME)**|||u|Y|100|Y
Source: http://www.otcbb.com/dailylist/txthistory/BB05182011.txt
If CCME has any intention [to make a filing or issue] an update or news, now would be a good time.
As an attorney, I understand that the advice Loeb provides to its clients regarding their obligations to report with the Securities and Exchange Commission, NASDAQ or otherwise is a confidential matter and discussion with parties unaffiliated with the issuer compromises Loeb's clients' position. Accordingly, I do not request a reply."
Let's say I was first to tell Loeb. (I doubt this very much). This kind of firm has the means to stay up to date on all such inbound correspondence and to rapidly prepare for such response. Moreover a firm handling publicly traded companies and SEC matters is paid to be prepared in case of an adverse ruling. At least they should be so prepared. This is why today's acknowledgment of the delisting notice without more was particularly disconcerting.
-Andrew
Any thoughts on the after hours trade which happened to be at $3.85? Was that a forced buy?
-Andrew
Ben: Yes I did get out. Like all trapped longs since the halt, I gave the company a long awaited chance to say something-- anything. Cheng Zheng's silent was deafening. There was ample chance to produce PR of any kind.
The time for CCME to punish shorts was at the open or in the premarket. CCME failed to deliver. (pun intended).
When CCME made no announcement of anything other than the delisting, I saw no good thesis or reason for a squeeze. No incentive for onlookers to swoop in and drive shares higher. I did see reason for the price to go down, that perhaps Cheng Zheng and his cronies intend to buy even more for cheap after this goes as low as the market will allow by non-PR inertia, that the CEO wants the stock down. For all I knew, Zheng really has sold in the 20's and he knowingly orchestrated the attacks with local cronies (at least one) at DTT. I felt like I was at an already bad odds electronic horserace in a cheap casino where the race was also rigged. So after looking at the open and considering that company provided no reason at all for someone to buy, today was the first day I had a chance to sell CCME, and I sold it all. It was a busy day on the Board so my messages may have fallen through the cracks. Here are two posts noting my decision to sell all:
http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=63322794 and
http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=63326973
My failsafe back in March was to sell if we crossed below 10. That opportunity never arrived. Really the CEO's actions solely reflect utter contempt and disrespect for shareholders. I wonder if the local bank branches that may have produced falsified statements committed such an obvious fraud that this angle may be persued by Chinese authorities. For shareholders, I look forward to suits against DTT for recklessness. This will be up to the class action lawyers. The class action firms will have to expand the class definition to include those who lost today (which would include me and probably most private shareholders of record on the day of the halt).
Ben, I hope you are doing well and wish you and everyone in CCME good luck.
This entire CCME experience was something from which I've learned a lot. I've enjoyed meeting some talented intelligent people in the process and will use my loss for wonderful tax savings.
-Andrew
Rato: I hope this message and cautionary thoughtful messages by Traderfan helped protect some longs from taking too big a stake in CCME. Credit where credit is due. I went much more in on the final Ping Luo Report. Lesson learned.
-Andrew
Blueskydiving: We did not know there's be no news released before the open. It's entirely possible facts were (perhaps even are) available to be stated by PR which could have made today, and therefore your most recent message, very different.
-Andrew
Zaudio - Thank you for all your contributions and keeping an open mind. Your talents will make you money in other names. CCME is like the low odds horse race game in the old Vegas strip.
-Andrew
CCME.pk - Not all bad. They throw quite a party for their knee-deep cronies.
Rave Reviews for the 2011 Grand Spring Festival Gala & the 7th Anniversary Celebrations of China MediaExpress Holdings, Inc.
On the evening of Jan. 17th 2011, the 2011 Grand Spring Festival Gala & the 7th Anniversary celebrations of China MediaExpress Holdings, Inc. were held in Westin Fuzhou Hotel. Attendees included Mr. Guo Ronggui, Vice Minister of United Front Work Department of CPC Fuzhou Municipal Committee and Secretary of the Party Leadership Group of Fuzhou Federation of Industry and Commerce, Mr. Huang Liangping, Secretary of Education Working Committee, Minister of Publicity and Member of Standing CPC Committee of Gulou District, Fuzhou, Mr. Liu Changqi, Standing Deputy Mayor and Member of CPC Fuzhou Jin'an District Standing Committee, Mrs. Lin Feng, Minister of United Front Work Department, CPC Fuzhou Gulou District Committee, Mr. Fang Zhongbing, Former Deputy Director of Fujian People's Congress, Former President of Fujian Higher People's Court, President of Chamber of Commerce of Fujian Housing Industry, Judge of the People's Republic of China and President of Chamber of Commerce and other distinguished guests from various enterprises and institutions.
Compared to the former celebrations, this year's event has for the first time combined customer appreciation into the staff gala with the company's leaders, customers and staff gathering together thereby highlighting the theme of Harmonious and Joint Development of China MediaExpress Holdings, Inc.. Mr. Huang Wenlin, Former Member of CPC Fujian Provincial Standing Committee, Secretary General of CPC Fujian Provincial Committee, Vice Director of Fujian People's Congress, Vice President of Chinese Enterprises Union and Association and President of Fujian Enterprises and Entrepreneurs Union sent a congratulatory message to celebrate the 7th Anniversary of China MediaExpress Holdings, Inc. and offered his best wishes for the further progress of the company in future. Mr. Guo Ronggui, Vice Minister of United Front Work Department of CPC Fuzhou Municipal Committee and Secretary of the Party Leadership Group of Fuzhou Federation of Industry and Commerce, and Zheng Cheng, President & CEO of China MediaExpress Holdings, Inc. gave an important address at the event, summarizing the brilliant achievements of China MediaExpress Holdings, Inc. during the past year and putting forward new prospects for the future strategic development.
The 2011 Grand Spring Festival Gala opened with a hot music and dance item and was hosted by presenters from Fujian Southeast TV and News Channel of Fujian TV. During the gala, wonderful programs such as dynamic songs and dances, sexy dance music and humorous bubble show gained continuous applause from the audience. A spectacular laser dance brought the gala to a climax. Besides these exciting shows, the wonderful performances by the staff of China MediaExpress Holdings, Inc also attracted everyone's attention. There were a singing group comprising the staff from different branches as well as an emotional song performed by the staff of the wholly-owned subsidiary of China MediaExpress Holdings Inc i.e. Fujian Suliangou Media Co., Ltd. about their hope for the future. In addition, the Lucky Draw, unique "Funny Advertisements" segment and the interactive games between the staff and guests injected much fun into the event amidst a joyful atmosphere.
The event ended with a corporate song sung by the staff of China MediaExpress Holdings, Inc. "Xin Xiang Shi Cheng". The 2011 Grand Spring Festival Gala & the 7th Anniversary celebrations of China MediaExpress Holdings, Inc. were successfully completed. This event showcased the unique corporate culture of China MediaExpress Holdings, Inc. to the guests, strengthened teamwork and bonding among the staff, and greatly encouraged the company's leaders, customers and staff to work together towards a brighter future for China MediaExpress Holdings, Inc.
Source: http://www.ccme.tv/eng/news/corpnews_content.php?evt=20110202
Check out the pictures.
-Andrew
CCME.pk - 1MM in marketcap loss for for each missing earnout share...
-Andrew
Maybe some shorts closed out their positions in recent private transactions. Just one more variable.
CCME has been #1 read Board on IHub. the last two days it traded.
China MediaExpress Holdings, Inc. (CCME) 188,333
Wont top the near 500K on the day of the halt.
-Andrew
NASDAQ is removed from the iBox. iBox is updated. Moot information is removed.
Or if there is a real business that it is not being gutted or bilked from within.
Acimbluedog: Thank you. CCME has been quite an experience. -Andrew
Dipstick: Go back and read all messages on this Board and the CGS Board from January 27 through the halt. As you read, keep in mind a distinction between hitpiece fabrication and all other possible sources of fabrication.
-Andrew