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.
Come on op....there's always a "snag" for the last 5 1/2 years. It's the same pattern over and over. JMHO
Nice post. I couldn't have said it better. IMHO Megas gave up on this long ago. As far as Attaway waiting around for $20000, I would gladly agree to (sign) a contract to pay him $1000 IF he can get a settlement of .05 (or more) per share. I'm sure others would do the same.
I guess this is what happens when the SEC gets involved in a DTC "chill".
CELEBRATION, Fla., April 19, 2010 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) -- International Power Group, Ltd. (Pink Sheets:IPWG - News), a leading provider of waste-to-energy solutions, including waste-to-energy development and waste-to-energy technologies, announced that on April 14, 2010 the Securities Exchange Commission issued a ruling in the Administrative Appeal before the SEC in regard to IPWG's application for a stay of the Depository Trust Company ("DTC") chill on the public trading of IPWG's common stock.
In its ruling, the SEC denied the requested stay of the chill pending the decision of the SEC on the legality of the DTC's actions that are currently presented in the administrative appeal. As such, the DTC chill shall remain in place. The SEC found that IPWG did not present sufficient evidence to prove that IPWG or its shareholders have suffered "irreparable harm" by DTC's actions and that the chill did not appear to "negatively affect the efficiency of the market in IPWG shares".
The SEC further stated: "To the extent that investors experienced difficulties trading IPWG shares after the suspension of services, it appears that the policies of their brokers, rather than any requirements of the DTC, caused such difficulties.
IPWG's CEO, John Benvengo stated, "we are obviously disappointed with this ruling, but we view it merely as a setback, and not the final answer. We intend to continue to fight to convince the SEC that IPWG and its shareholders have suffered tremendous harm by the DTC chill, that the market for IPWG shares has been negatively impacted and that the DTC chill is completely unjustified under the circumstances."
The SEC has asked several questions of the parties and has set a schedule for further submissions to the SEC administrative appellate panel: (1) on May 13, 2010 the DTC will file its response to the questions raised by the SEC; (2) on June 14, 2010 IPWG submits its response and opposition to the DTC's response; and (3) on June 28, 2010 the DTC will file a reply to IPWG's submission.
A copy of the ruling and the Company's motion papers requesting a stay will be made available on the Company's website.
http://finance.yahoo.com/news/International-Power-Group-Ltd-pz-2075886898.html?x=0&.v=1
The DTCC is just doing what any other form of organized crime would do. They are using their power and influence to cover up their activity. The SEC is truly the pathetic POS in all of this. JMHO
Since my money is probably gone for good, it sure would be nice to read more than an opinion on a message board, about what happened. You'd think that when a goverment agency relieves 1000+ people of their money, they would be obligated (by law) to give a detailed reason why. At face value this just looks like Megas was found guilty by attrition. JMHO
Stop BCIT from being revoked would be job 1 IMHO
If Burns is dealing with this objectively, as we hope he is, then the ball is in the DTCC's court. If Burns is saying that Megas has to file, just to have a seat at the table, then imo the DTCC is just setting up the hoops again.
This sounds like an "official" response.
"I am only prepared to file if I have a guarantee that the DTC is prepared to clear notwithstanding any problems they have created for themselves"
The way I read this is, if the "global lock" is lifted, Megas will file. The DTCC specifically stated that the the "global lock" was still in place, beacause BCIT had no T/A. Why can't Burns inform the DTCC that in fact BCIT does have a T/A. If the DTCC lifts the "global lock" then Megas will file. Seems simple. Burns listed the T/A as"global lock" issue, and the filings as a SEC issue. They should be addressed seperately. JMHO
Is Burns an investigator, or a mediator? This situation is 4 years old everything that happened is easy to look up. I hope Burns is not as naive as he seems to be.
I thought the DTCC stated the "global lock" was still in place because BCIT had no T/A?
Talk is cheap..... Why don't you have your BCIT shares declared worthless by your broker, and post the transaction here. If you know what you know, then just do it!
This is what their website says. The DTCC is responsible for trades made by their customers/participants. You know it, we know it, and they know it, and that's why BCIT is not trading.
By operating as central counterparties and
thus taking the risk onto themselves, DTCC’s
clearing subsidiaries help the industry reduce the
risk associated with trading, while freeing up
available capital. The clearing corporations do this
by stepping in between the seller and buyer of
each trade to assume the counterparty credit risk
and the responsibility to deliver the securities to
the buyer and payment to the seller. This is the
function of a central counterparty.
In the course of assuming this level of risk,
each DTCC regulated subsidiary sets minimum
standards for capital adequacy and collateral that
its customers must meet in order to do business.
http://www.dtcc.com/downloads/about/Introduction_to_DTCC.pdf
Doesn't this statement by the DTCC claim that they are "responsible" for this whole situation?
By operating as central counterparties and
thus taking the risk onto themselves, DTCC’s
clearing subsidiaries help the industry reduce the
risk associated with trading, while freeing up
available capital. The clearing corporations do this
by stepping in between the seller and buyer of
each trade to assume the counterparty credit risk
and the responsibility to deliver the securities to
the buyer and payment to the seller. This is the
function of a central counterparty.
In the course of assuming this level of risk,
each DTCC regulated subsidiary sets minimum
standards for capital adequacy and collateral that
its customers must meet in order to do business.
http://www.dtcc.com/downloads/about/Introduction_to_DTCC.pdf
I had a feeling that responding to your post would be a wasted effort...
Because the DTCC refuses to clear trades unless BCIT covers the counterfeits the DTCC underwrote, and made eligible.
Management believes that reducing the number of shares of our outstanding common stock resulting from the reverse stock split and the recognition of all new common stock as validly issued and outstanding will enable us to qualify our common stock for trading utilizing the clearing services of the Depository Trust Company (“DTC”). We have been advised that DTC terminated its trading services with respect to our common stock due to our inability to specify which shares of our common stock are validly issued. We currently recognize the aggregate 550,049,408 outstanding shares that we are unable to confirm are validly issued. Therefore, following the reverse stock split, if implemented by our Board of Directors, we intend to apply for approval of DTC to reinstate its clearing services for our common stock. We do not know whether the DTC will consider such actions sufficient for the DTC to resume clearing transactions in our common stock.
http://secfilings.nasdaq.com/filingFrameset.asp?FileName=0001144204-08-020290.txt&FilePath=\2008\04\03\&CoName=BANCORP+INTERNATIONAL+GROUP%2C+INC.&FormType=10KSB&RcvdDate=4%2F3%2F2008&pdf=
So basically, you feel that guilty until proven innocent applies here? The SEC has no proof of Megas being involved in anything, so they're letting the DTCC "front" for them until they can find something....That's sad imo
When you have a system, where agencies and corporations are allowed to operate in complete secrecy, and are immune to any inquiries about what they're doing, does it really matter who regulates who on paper? To this day, I still can't get a hard copy, or a link that legally defines a "global lock", and the steps needed to remove it. I've written the DTCC, and SEC several times about it.
After all that has been exposed in the last year about the way the SEC operates, it's hard to believe you don't think it is a least possible that they have just turned a blind eye to this situation. The DTCC is a private corporation, that would be liable if BCIT was grossly shorted. It's been 4 years, and IMHO it is human nature that a shareholder would be getting pizzed off, that a private corporation is prohibiting his/her stock from trading without providing an explanation. JMHO
I guess you missed this one...
NEW YORK, June 13, 2005 (PRIMEZONE) -- Mr. Thomas Megas, President of Bancorp International Group Inc., trading symbol (Pink Sheets:BCIT), makes this announcement in order to correct inaccurate statements made previously by Carter Care Inc, its agents, representatives and others purporting to represent BCIT and Carter Care have completed a reverse merger.
Let it be known that BCIT has never entered into any agreement, neither oral nor written or ever had any contact with Carter Care or anyone associated with Carter Care prior to June 4th 2005. Also, no such agreement has been entered into since June 4th 2005. No officer of BCIT or any of its controlling Shareholders have been involved with Carter Care prior to June 4th 2005. Upon learning of the claimed reverse merger, BCIT commenced an investigation which is still ongoing. Carter Care, upon being informed of the above by BCIT, and at the request of BCIT issued a statement. The purpose of this statement was to remedy the incorrect announcements that Carter Care had completed a reverse merger with BCIT.
At no time has BCIT issued any statement that relates to any merger or reverse merger in the last six months. BCIT has not authorized nor issued any BCIT shares to any person or any legal entity in the last five months. Any shares issued by Carter Care are without the knowledge and authority of the board of directors of BCIT and its shareholders and are therefore deemed null and void and constitute no obligation or liability on BCIT or its shareholders
http://www.globenewswire.com/newsroom/news.html?d=79836
Every penny stock I've ever seen that has been halted/suspended, and abandoned, usually winds up at .0001 especially after 4 years. For some reason BCIT has stayed at .05
Why isn't BCIT at .0001 if it's never going to trade again?
Where did you read that Megas wanted to "sell" BCIT, and took a "down payment"? tia
Have you declared BCIT worthless, and had it removed from your brokerage account?
Every time the DTCC is taken to court about "naked shorting" they always claim immunity by way of "federal preemption", rather than release trade data to prove innocence. Why is that?
I guess the scale and complexity of what happened to BCIT must staggering. The SEC has filed charges within weeks of the Madoff, Stanford cases being brought to there (limited) attention. If you own shares of BCIT, and are not at least as suspicious about the incredible length of time taken by the SEC, to weigh in here (imho they never will)as you are about Megas's actions, then you know/read something that's not available to the rest of us. JMHO
Is there any way humanly possible, that you could have taken that statement further out of context than you did? Take stab at the actual question. tia
So you don't care if the SEC takes eternity to investigate, and the DTCC never says anything, yet you DEMAND immediate "accountability" from Megas (the guy you don't believe anyway). LmAo
In the first place I don't think most "Corporate world of America" players, proudly list the DoM on their resumes.
The only "BCIT scam" I understand, is the one described in the SEC release following their 3 year investigation.
The DTCC won't explain to anyone why there is a "global lock".(maybe you could ask them)
Scottrade has my "funds"
Hard to believe somebody with an honorary PHD in finance didn't get all of that documented....LmAo
Hon. M.A. Pino
honmariopino@gmial.com
WORK OF EXPERIENCE
EDUCATION
Arizona State University
Dominion of Melchizedek Honorary PHD Finance.
http://www.free-press-release.com/news/200810/1223324270.html
That's the funniest thing I've read all week! Sure if you buy something out of the trunk of a car, your on your own. I'd love to hear Sears , Best Buy, Macy's..etc inform the retail public that they have no idea whether their merchandise is real or not, and tough sh#t if you buy a "knock off" from them. JMHO
You're keeping a close watch on a stock that is going to be "revoked". JMHO
Yeah..... These guys!!
"He told a House subcommittee hearing that "the SEC is ... captive to the industry it regulates and is afraid" to bring big cases against prominent individuals. The agency "roars like a lion and bites like a flea," Markopolos said."
http://finance.yahoo.com/news/Madoff-tipster-Harry-apf-14249863.html
In case you haven't noticed, it has been "years".
So what are they waiting for? tia
What!! You don't trust Larry "federal preemption" Thompson, and the DTCC? LmAo
Oh I know this is all about attrition....Just meant I give up on a consistent discussion as far as what the problem is.
The DTCC won't lift the "global lock" because the shares are counterfeit, and the SEC won't let it trade because the counterfeits aren't registered? I give up.
Can you please direct me to the SEC/DTCC document explaining exactly what it is that they want? How about a link from the DTCC explaining the reasons for the "global lock". tia
"His stubborn refusal to deal properly with the DTC/SEC has hurt shareholders for over +3 years"
All the more reason why the the DTCC and/or SEC should provide a reason to the shareholders, for their position in this case. IMHO