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.
From over 2 months ago
Notice the part in bold. IMO, they are saying "get ready for a MASSIVE RS", as they sure aren't uplisting without meeting requirements. IMO, they may do a massive RS, and attempt to uplist. Maybe they are successful. If so, I suspect they will uplist after a massive RS and then get delisted soon after. All in my opinion of course. Part of their game plan, imo.
(Paivis Corp. Reports on Corporate Developments and Strategic Objectives
Paivis Corp. (OTCBB: PAVC) reported on its recent corporate developments and ongoing strategic objectives.
As previously announced, the Company has completed its transition to the new transfer agent, Corporate Stock Transfer, Denver, Colorado. The agency has already commenced activities on the Company’s behalf. Management looks forward to pursuing its corporate and operational goals for the benefit of the Corporation its shareholders.
The Company has made solid progress on its business initiatives, including the following:
Paivis’s products are currently available at 5,500 locations nationwide, an increase of 1,500 since January 2007. The Company is looking to continue expansion of the Company’s distribution channels by rolling out products to a total of 25,000 locations by the end of 2008.
In 2006, the Company entered into a distribution agreement with a major retail distributor of prepaid products and services in the U.S. The Company continues to pursue additional distribution partnerships and partnerships opportunities.
Paivis continues to seek and identify potential acquisition targets. In order to complete strategic transactions, the Company will require additional capital.
The Company reaffirms that it is committed to pursuing listing on the NASDAQ or the American Stock Exchange. The Company will strive to meet the listing requirements, however, there can be no guarantee that any listing application will be approved, or that the Company will meet the listing criteria.
Gregory L. Bauer, President and Chief Executive Officer of Paivis, said: “We remain focused on executing on our strategic goals. Also, we continue looking for expansion opportunities that will provide growth and ultimately increase shareholder value.”
FORWARD-LOOKING STATEMENTS
The Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995 (the “PLSLRA”) provides a "safe harbor" for forward-looking statements so long as those statements are identified as forward-looking and are accompanied by meaningful cautionary statements identifying important factors that could cause actual results to differ materially from those projected in such statements.
Statements contained herein that are not based on historical fact, as well as other statements including words such as "anticipate," "believe," "plan," "estimate," "expect," "intend," "will," "could" and other similar expressions, constitute forward-looking statements under the PSLRA. PAIVIS intends that such forward-looking statements be subject to the safe harbor created thereby. Such forward-looking statements are based on current assumptions but involve known and unknown risks and uncertainties that may cause PAIVIS actual results, performance or achievements to differ materially from current expectations. These risks include economic, competitive, governmental, technological and other factors discussed in PAIVIS annual, quarterly and other periodic public filings on record with the Securities and Exchange Commission which can be viewed free of charge on its website at http://www.sec.gov.
Paivis Corp.
Greg Bauer
Chief Executive Officer
Phone: 404-601-2885
www.paivis.com
or
The Investor Relations Group
Investor Relations:
Katrine Winther-Olesen / Emily Hanan
or
Media: Richard Wagner / Mike Graff
Phone: 212-825-3210
Source: Business Wire (May 17, 2007 - 9:43 AM EST)
News by QuoteMedia
www.quotemedia.com )
You may find an L but I doubt you'll find a P ;>)
(I do not see an actual P&L.
Is there one?)
Of course not.
(Is this heading under a dime?)
I said it was very likely to head under .10 or even go sub penny. But O posted repeatedly that it was almost a certainty to hit $1 and $3 - $5 was likely.
My opinion was bashed and everybody said I was wrong, had no idea what I was talking about and etc. The very same people all jumped on O's prediction and claimed he/she knew what was going on far more then most and everybody believed his/her repeated predictions.
So, since everybody believes O, it isnt possible for this to drop below .10 and $1 is coming and $3-$5 is very possible.
I assume O and all that said $1, $3, $5 was coming have been buying like crazy.
I sure would buy a .14 stock if it was so certain to hit $1, let alone $3-$5.
Anybody think they will file soon or file at all? I hope they do. I for one would love to see it.
GLTA/PR
I discussed AURC in relation with two other companies that both were discussed on this board.
So how is discussing AURC a TOS violation? Because I also mentioned 2 other stocks that are 'related' to AURC?
If that is a TOS violation, then I guess more then 75% of posts on AURC board are also TOS violations.
Will you deny that there were hundreds of posts made on THIS board talking about NDOL and NNRF (and NWOG) and people were connecting them with AURC?
Please ask the moderator to remove EVERY post that mentions any other stock besides AURC. If not, my post is as on topic as all of the others that talked about the same stocks I did, ON THIS VERY BOARD!
My post was 100% on topic. Your response to me is a different story.
Yes. Pretty funny (sad for shareholders) and obvious.
(Excellent question... Now why would a company that is fixing to get BOUGHT OUT of ALL OUTSTANDING shares for .55 per share in CASH, want to have a meeting to talk about their business model? becaise they're stringing us along...AGAIN!!!
After being sold, they want to have a shareholders meeting to talk about a biz model they no longer own and with shareholders that now have CASH and NO STOCK and aren't shareholders anymore? Can you believe these guys? This is hilarious!!!)
Now, ask yourself why PAVC has not taken the same legal action! They have been blaming the brokers and everybody under the sun for a year now, yet the only legal action they attempted was against their own TA and what happend to that?
I myself would be very curious why the company claims the brokers are at fault, yet they have not taken legal action in over a year.
(Overstock.com Wins Ruling in Prime Brokerage Litigation)
Pretty harsh accusations. Claiming a broker has stolen money from you.
Why are you not suing them or having criminal charges filed?
If somebody "stole my money", you can rest assured They would be sued and I would do everything possible to have criminal charges filed as well.
It has been a year and most everybody on this board thinks the company is not at fault. Fine, if that is what you really think, then file suit against who you think is at fault or have criminal charges filed.
(If it wasn't my money they have stolen and have no intention of returning it would be funny. Lindy)
No kidding!!
Of course the SEC does not DO AUDITS.
But AUDITED FINANCIALS are FILED with the SEC.
And imo, if they are not APPROVED AUDITED numbers and FILED with the SEC, they mean nothing.
(i would image he meant SEC approved audited financials and he would be correct.)
Yes, thank you.
Amazing how naive some can be.
If they are not SEC AUDITED financials, they mean nothing.
Proof of what?
Are you planning to give me, an anonymous message board poster, your personal information and trading records?
Thanks, but not interested and my advice would be to not offer to give out your personal information on message boards.
GLTY/PR
Do you mean $1000.00 or $1,000,000.00 ?
Not that it really matters.
I could say I have 100mil or bil invested or $10 invested. Does it prove anything?
Frankly, I typicaly laugh at message board posters that toot their own horn and brag about how much money they make or how wealthy they are.
Glad you appear to be doing well, though.
GLTY/PR
Rather not say, as I feel old enough as it is ;>)
I'll give you this much. I am over 40 and younger then 70.
How long have I been in this game, you ask?
Since the day I knew what money was at a fairly young age ;^)
Something positive for you.
I suspect you'll get your wish and get several more pumps, which should enable you to make a profit, depending on your cost basis and if the pump works or not and how high it gets pumped.
Right now, sentiment in AURC sucks. But most that play the penny stocks know how the game is played.
Many, I suspect will try to buy as low as they can, expecting a pump that they can sell in to.
I for one will not be one of the spec buyers, as I am not convinced enough that a pump will do much for AURC at this point in time.
But, it certainly is possible and I suspect is the plan.
So, don't lose faith. Very possible you get out with a profit. If not, it's a lesson learned which is also very valuable and will pay off for you in the future. You will likely either make future gains or avoid future losses, simply on what you learned here with AURC.
GLTY/PR
It's not Heritages problem.
It is the shareholders problem if they are invested in a company whose TA cannot answer very important questions.
Yes, I admit this is very common with penny stocks, in that the TA doesn't know something or gives shareholders the runaround, but it is still the shareholders problem as it is your money on the line.
(Why is it Heritage's problem if they do not know about the dividend or buyout?)
I agree. The real story may never be known.
You lost me with the comment about my health.
Were you taking a shot at me by inferring my mental health is not well? In other words, a way to call me a looney tune without breaking the TOU?
Last I checked, both my mental and physical health were just fine.
Can you show me a PR where they say PAVC and it's management are 100% innocent of any wrongdoing over the past year with the many issues that arose?
I see PR's in which they claim others are at fault, claim they are being harmed by the berlin exchange and etc.
I know they have PR's blaming others, but please show me one in which they declare 100% that they are 100% innocent and had nothing to do with any of the many issues that occured over the past year.
You cant unless you make one up. I have read every PR. And yes, I do see them blaming others. First the brokers, then their own TA, the berlin exchange and etc. But nowhere did they ever actually say "we are 100% innocent and have no knowledge of any wrong doing by PAVC or it's management and have nothing to do with the many issues that have plagued our company"
I also notice you are trying to give investment advice by telling people to pull their certs and move to a specific broker.
Are you licensed to give out that kind of financial advice? How about all the posts you made when this was ALOT higher, telling people not to sell and that this was guaranteed to see $1 and $3 - $5 was possible? That was obviously very poor advice for anybody that took it, as it has been in free fall mode and is down a huge % since you repeteadly gave out that poor investment advice. Are you licensed to give that kind of advice?
No offense intended, but most everybody that trades penny stocks knows that when a company starts PR'ing that shareholders need to pull their certs to help the company, that is a very large red flag. I myself laughed when the company PR'd that.
And since then, the pps has done what?
Have a nice week.
I agree. Everybody did know that SAT was very suspect.
Yet AURC did not know this until recently?
Management is quite inept, imo, if that is the case.
They either did not know something that everybody else did or they did know and still chose to use a very shammy TA.
Either way, it does not make AURC or it's management look like they know what they are doing, imo.
If Heritage is so easy to communicate with, why do they have no answers to almost every major issue with AURC. They know nothing about the divy. They refer you back to the company for info on the buyout.
You call this good communication? They are the TA for AURC, but know so little and have very few answers and can only say "I dont know" or "contact the company"?
(poiuyt20011 - Everyone knows that SAT was not a good TA. Aurus fired them and got Heritage. Heritage is easy to communicate with.)
Have you looked at the previous TA?
How much more proof do you need?
Saying the TA is the WORST is not libel, when the TA has had so many serious issues and has been involved in quite a few shams.
The previous TA is well known on wallstreet as being very dubious. It is something known by most everybody.
As far as the new TA, I do not think enough is known at this point.
I will say it is odd that the new TA knows nothing about the divy and wants to refer you back to the company for info on the buyout.
(Where is your evidence for this libelous assertion?
"yes we do, AURC is using the worst of the worst TA's")
Why does everybody demand 'proof' of anything negative posted, but nobody demands proof of the positive stuff posted?
Looking at the facts, there has been far more positive stuff posted and not very much of it had any proof and it still doesn't. Yet people do not want proof of the positives and only want the negative stuff proven?
IMO, at this stage, the company and those that touted the company with all the unproven speculative junk, are the ones that now bare the burden of proof.
IMO, considering this has been over a year and since day one everybody has claimed the brokers were at fault, the SEC, NASD, AG and etc, have very likely all received many complaints, all asking them to look in to the fraudulent actions of the brokerages.
The fact no action has been taken by any governing agency against any broker and that every major brokerage has put in writing they are not responsible for this mess is pretty much proof that the brokerages were not at fault.
The most telling factor, aside from the fact the brokers have put it in writing they are not at fault and the company has not put in writing that they are not at fault and have done nothing wrong, is the fact that the company has said they have been aware of the odd trading for a year and have been investigating, yet they have taken no legal action against any broker. Not a single one. They did PR however at one time, that they were going after the old TA legally.
Did they follow thru on that? If the company truly has done nothing wrong and they knew nothing about this fiasco, why will they not say it in writing?
Brokers have put stuff in writing, no legal action has been taken against any broker by any governing agency or the company and the company refuses to put in writing that they are 100% innocent and had nothing to do with this fiasco.
Normaly, the innocent speak very loudly if accused of wrongdoing. If the company is 100% innocent, they would be issuing PR after PR declaring their innocence, yet they have not done so.
Sometimes people need to seperate their feelings from the position they hold in a security and look at things with a bit of reality and common sense.
Yes, and very obvious.
It is a shame many only see what they want to see and ignore the obvious.
I was not asked politely!
I was attacked by the masses. Only AFTER the attacks did a few people ask me nicely.
You get more with honey then you do with vinegar. Why would I want to provide information to those who are attacking me?
Had people asked nicely at first, it may have been a different story.
In any event, if you want to say I am FULL OF IT, that is your choice. I do see however that you have changed opinions and are now bashing the company, yet nobody is asking you for proof or links to the many negative things you are posting.
I will not return the insult and simply wish you and all shareholders good luck with your AURC.
When I posted that I had heard several rumors, one of them being that the terms of the deal may have changed and AURC holders may end up with restricted stock in a different company, I was jumped on and beaten down by most.
For those that said I was fabricating lies, I think it has been proven that many rumors do indeed exist, and one of them is the terms of the buyout have changed.
Is this factual? No, it is a rumor. Just like everything said about this company, whether positive or negative. People seem to eat up and love the positive rumors, but consider every negative rumor a fabricated lie.
Company has PR'd that the divy would be mailed in a week and that was how long ago?
Company PR'd that updates on production would be coming. That was how long ago?
Company PR'd buyout was accepted and done and they would inform shareholders shortly when all i's are dotted and t's crossed. That was how long ago?
Today the company puts out another shammy pr and there is not a single mention of the 3 main things the company said they would be communicating to shareholders. The Divy, Production and Buyout. Instead they put out a pr with no mention of any of the main things people are waiting to hear about and talk about some shareholder meeting they will hold in the U.S. and they are not even firm on when the meeting will take place, only that it will not be all that soon.
In the PR they said the meeting was to discuss the business model.
Now why would a company that is fixing to get BOUGHT OUT of ALL OUTSTANDING shares for .55 per share in CASH, want to have a meeting to talk about their business model?
Supposedly the business has been sold, the .55 was accepted and the deal was done.
Yet after being sold, they want to have a shareholders meeting to talk about a biz model they no longer own and with shareholders that now have CASH and NO STOCK and aren't shareholders anymore?
That is almost too funny.
GLTA/PR
( This is looking like the buyout turns merger scam. And yes, NDOL(Gerald Parkin) did scam shareholders on that one. This is shaping up just like it. A cash buyout was announced. Later the buyout "discussions" turn to merger and we are left with a bunch of worthless shares in a new company which is more heavily diluted and the wait goes on. )
Why contact them? They are russian and are corrupt, imo.
I think he wants to get some kind of AMERICAN verification. If I were long, I would want that as well and would question why AURC refuses to get AMERICAN VERIFICATION.
You have to admitt that IF you had any company that claimed to have what AURC does and you COULD prove it in a way that is LEGIT, you WOULD!
The fact AURC chooses to not verify thru legit AMERICAN means is a very big red flag, imo.
The other HUGE red flag is a supposed DONE DEAL for CASH at a minimum of .55, possibly more, where all you have to do is buy today at .07 and do nothing and shortly the shares will disappear and will be replaced with cash* number of shares you own, yet smart investors are NOT BUYING AT .07!!!
They said NEXT WEEK!
(The shareholders benefiting from this dividend shall receive, by mail, their share certificates without any action on their part or any surrender of certificates.
The shares shall be posted during the course of the next week and shall be included in any and all buyout proposals.
--->REMINDER: The DIVIDEND Shares = to 10% of your AURC Share Position as of the 'Record Date' Feb 15th 2007! ;))
Did they really mean next year? "next week' was quite a long time ago.
Why have they not followed thru? After saying 'next week', there is no excuse it has been this long with no update!
Why PR next week knowing it was not going to happen by then and why will they refuse to give any udates after all this time? Why does the new TA not know anything about this Divy?
If Jeremy is still IR, how can he not know certain answers? Why has he suddenly stopped talking to people or returning people's calls or e-mails?
Why is a stock guaranteed to put at least .55 CASH in your pocket only trading at .07? Why arent people lined up to buy at .07 IF .55 CASH is guaranteed and the deal is all but done?
Why will company not prove it's claims via normal methods? Why do they expect people to believe corrupt Russian organizations when they could prove it thru means that americans would trust?
Why no official filings with SEC regarding their claims? If they really had that much gold, why would they not have a well known and established AMERICAN firm to confirm they have what they claim? That would certainly prove they have what they say, yet they dont do something so simple that would prove they have what they claim?
Has anybody called any well known american firms and asked about AURC, showed them the claims by AURC and asked for their opinions on why they will not get a legit american firm to confirm the claims of the gold reserves?
I did! And I was told 'because they likely do not have what they claim and no credible american firm will say so if it is not true, whereas the russian ministry and other corrupt russian organizations have no problem telling lies. It is what they do best'.
These are questions I would give very serious thoughts to, imo.
No response necessary. I will no longer respond to the 'baited attacks' tossed at me. But, I will feel free to post my opinions, facts, speculations, as I see fit, just as everybody is doing.
On the message boards!!
I have heard MANY rumors in many different places.
IHUB is not the only place AURC is being discussed.
Maybe there is some truth to the buyout changing to $1.28 cash. I will be first to admitt I have heard it several times, in several places from several sources.
Same thing with some of the negative rumors I have been hearing.
Are any of them true?
Only the company can answer that.
I for one do not think shareholders will like the final answer. IMO, this is nothing but another russian sham, just like the previous ones that were touted by same people touting AURC.
I am not going to waste any time looking at every pink and OTC that did a deal in which shareholders ended up with restricted shares to see if it was approved by shareholders.
As you know and said, with most pinks and OTC's the insiders control the voting rights, hence they can do what they want, without approval from shareholders.
Furthermore, I think it is safe to say that not many shareholders in a pink or OTC would vote YES to any deal that gives them restricted shares. I am sure it has happened, but imo, not very often at all.
Can you show a list of pinks and OTC's in which shareholders DID VOTE YES? Again, I am sure there have been some, but with the large majority of pinks and otc's, shareholders dont have a say. Insiders control the vote and do what they want, normaly at the expense of shareholders.
Did AURC shareholders get a vote? I recall reading the PR's that said the company would recommend to the BOARD that they accept the deal. Am I wrong on this (I could be)? Did AURC shareholders get to vote?
In any event, imo it is a moot point. This is the penny stock game and most penny stock companies, as you said, control the vote and very few penny stocks give shareholders any power in such matters as even if they can vote on something, insiders will trump any vote shareholders make.
And for all we know, the rumors about the deal changing to restricted shares and the rumors saying the deal is now $1.28 in CASH, could either be B.S. or there may be something to either rumor. Obviously we will not know for sure until the company shows it's full hand and actually does something.
However, due to the point that you made, in that insiders control the vote, that is why there are so many deals in which shareholders have free trading shares one day and then a deal is done and they are left with restricted shares.
Best of luck to you as well.
(poi, you have shown great examples of otc's skirting the law with rm's and rs's etc. But can you show me a clearcut example of A acquiring B with restricted stock without shareholder approval?
Many of these deals are done because mgmt has voting control via pfd's and converts that give them voting control.
I will agree with you that the pinks are shark infested waters and buyer beware.
Best of luck,
Vic)
Progress is GOOD!!
http://perihelionglobal.com/goldmine.php
OK. Thanks again.
I will say that although I respect JB for trying to defend the company here on IHUB, I would prefer he spent his time on business, not posting on message boards.
If he gets PHGI successful, that is all we need to see. Get the company(s) going, get the PPS up and that is all the defense he needs.
He does not need to be wasting time posting to certain people, attempting to bait him, imo.
Just ignore them, ignore the MB's and concentrate on biz.
I like the sepculative prospects of PHGI. I like JB's track record. But, I have never been fond of CEO's posting on MB's. For any reason.
He can prove the detractors wrong by getting PHGI successful. Posting and getting into wars with other posters on a MB is not going to make PHGI look very credible, imo.
As a long, I would much prefer not see him posting on MB's. I would prefer him concentrate on biz. I am sure he is concentrating on biz, but really do not understand why he started so many MB's.
He should ignore the crazies or go after them with his lawyers, imo.
Can you please explain why it happens so often in pinks and otc's? I cant help but laugh and be skeptical when one says a pink or OTC can not exchange your free trading shares for restricted shares unless it is a divy.
Why then have so many pinks and OTCs done RS's and RM's that result in shareholders getting restricted stock? These arent divy's. These are aquisitions, mergers, RS's. RM's and etc. and can be found on the SEC website.
I only listed one example, although there are many, but you never did explain how you claim it is impossible unless it is a divy, yet JP and AP merged, then RS'd and all people were left with was worthless restricted stock. Do you know how many times this happens in the penny's, yet you say it is impossible? If impossible, how do you explain why it happens so often?
(I've seen restricted shares issued as a divy. But it is illegal to replace free trading shares with restricted shares in any change of control or merger. Even for pinks.)
IF it is illegal as you say, then there are an awful lot of companies breaking the law. If illegal, how do they do it? How is it approved and done if it is impossible or illegal?
In fact, when a penny announces a buyout, aquisition, rm, rs and etc, one of the biggest things shareholders FIRST look at is the TERMS to see if they will end up with restricted stock as per the terms of the deal, as most will try to get out, rather then holding thru a corporate action that will leave them with restricted and not free trading stock.
What will AURC do? I dont think anybody can answer that until they do it. The folks at PAVC thought they were getting free trading shares as well. Yet last second company actions trapped people that thought they had free trading shares and those free trading shares became restricted overnight, with only 15 minutes warning given to shareholders before market closed and shares were restricted the very next day, meaning not many had a chance to sell and watched it go from $12 a share down to .17 where it currently resides, but is dropping more everyday as it has been 1 year and people are filing to have the 144 restriction lifted so they can dump. Sadly, shares are worth 98% less then a year ago prior to the restrictions being thrown on people with no notice at all. Those people sure wish they had sold 98% higher when they were free trading!!
Do you know how many times this exact thing has happened and to how many companies in the penny's? If not, please do some DD on the sec website or PS. You may be quite alarmed at how many have pulled similar deals and shafting shareholders with restricted stock.
Will that happen with AURC? I dont know. I have heard rumors that it very well could happen, but I have also heard rumors that the buyout price was raised to I think $1.28 in CASH and will be done by end of Aug at latest. Will either of the two happen? I dont know. That is why they are called rumors.
However, why do people not mind the rumors that are positive and only attack the negative rumors? Look how many positive rumors have been posted about AURC. Nobody ever questions them, everybody just piles on and makes the positive rumors more widespread. Yet if a negative rumor is posted, it is automatically labeled as a fabrication? People here need to realize they are not walking on a one way street. It is two ways and the same traffic laws apply no matter which way you are travelling!
You cant even speak the truth?
I said I would not waste time helping people that treat me as many of you do.
Maybe if you guys had not attacked me, I would have been happy to help provide you with some links to the several places AURC is being duscussed in which I saw some of these rumors.
Heck, I also heard on some of the same boards that the terms have been changed to $1.28 per share, CASH. A positive rumor!!
But you guys attack and then ask the person you attack for info?
I dont think so!!!
GREAT POST!!!
I gave the details!!!
I also gave the origin.
THE MESSAGE BOARDS!!!!!
No need to discuss this further. 100% waste of time.
People can believe what they want.
When you get your divy and you get your .55 CASH, I will come back here and post for all to see that I WAS WRONG and CONGRATS TO ALL AURC LONGS!!!
However, imo, I doubt that will happen.
Tell that to the folks at PAVC.
Or for that matter, do some DD (nope, wont do it for you) and see just how many pinks and otc's have done exactly that. And I am not talking about issuing a restricted divy. I am talking aquisitions, RM's, RS's and etc and many times you are stuck with restricted shares.
If this is not possible then how exactly do MANY deals go thru like the JP and AP merger whicj formed PAIV and then did a RS to form PAVC and oh my----RESTRICTED SHARES is what you got!!
I could list MANY more, but do not feel the need to point out the obvious that anybody can go see themselves.
I agree. Negative opinions/rumors/speculation gets deleted very quickly on this board, while positives, no matter how ludicrous are allowed.
The funny thing is, IF THIS COMPANY IS REAL AND TELLING THE TRUTH, THERE IS NO REASON TO WORRY ABOUT ANY NEGATIVE RUMOR!!!
AURC will PROVE ALL NEGATIVE RUMORS TO BE FALSE, IF THEY ARE FOR REAL!
I did not fabricate a thing!!!
And your post is an attack/insult/lie and 100% off topic!!!
And you are busy making comments that 'one can only laugh at anybody holding that stock'?
Do you realize how long people have been laughing at this russian sham?
Dude, you are wasting my time.
Post to me when your pennys turn in to dollars.
This way you will never post to me again, which is fine by me!
Really?
You may be in for a shock.
They keep saying 'buyout', yet you seem to be missing the point.
Supposedly the TERMS have changed. It very well may be a Reverse Merger Now.
But if you don't think you can have free trading shares in a penny stock that become RESTRICTED for numerous reasons, then you have not played with the penny's too much obviously.
Pretty funny.
I still want to know why this board allows positive rumors but not negative ones?
If this company is so real, what are people afraid of?
If the buyout is real, the divy is real, then AURC shareholders will get CASH.
No negative rumors can or will effect that, if that is indeed what the company is going to do.
Frankly, everything said about AURC, positive or negative is rumors and hersay and will be until the truth is known.
If the divy comes thru and everybody gets .55 cash then I guess the positive rumors and speculation was true. If no divy and no .55 CASH buyout then I guess the negative rumors are true.
What I find odd is if this is real and if people truly believe in AURC then they have nothing to fear about negative rumors. Yet for some odd reason, people only want to hear the positive rumors and are scared of the negative rumors and once again, if AURC is on the up and up, then all negative rumors will be proven to be wrong soon enough.
Sorry. I have heard the rumors.
Again, why are positive rumors that are unverified allowed, but negative rumors are not?
Furthermore, I find it ironic you bash PHGI with pure B.S., call the ceo a used car salesman, call the company a scam, yet they are real and have proved it.
If they succeed is a different story, but they certainly have proven they are real, the CEO has an excellent track record, they communicate, yet here you are defending a real sham that has proven nothing, does not communicate, has not delivered on any promises and now there are rumors that the reason they are quiet is because terms of buyout have changed and AURC shareholders may end up with restricted stock.
Anyway, what gives you the right to bash a company that is 100 times more upfront, real and honest then this russian sham, while defending this sham and telling others not to post whatever about AURC?
You sure don't follow your own rules!!
No problem though. We'll see soon enough what happens with AURC and IMO, it will not be a happy day for shareholders when the truth comes out about this company.
Sources for a rumor?
The message boards!!
Same sources for all the positive RUMORS that were promised but have yet to be delivered.
May I ask why you think positive rumors are OK, but negative ones are not?
Rumors now circulating that the terms of the buyout have changed and it will not be an all cash deal.
It now looks like AURC longs will be holding RESTRICTED stock IF deal goes thru.
What company/symbol, I have no idea, but there are rumors that the deal is now going to leave AURC longs with RESTRICTED stock, not cash.
Could be true, could be B.S.
Hope it is not true for the longs sake, but wont be shocked if that is what happens.