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.
No, you have two separate entities, so it doesn't make logical sense to combine them. Just stick with one, GLCC and you will still have enough shres. Also, this would only really pertain to people who held EFGO through the split to present.
-J
Thanks mastaflash, metrolane, and XRV, CTL-F5 worked. I guess we have auto-execution turned off. I would think that they would have a fixed text link on the page to account for that, though.
Thanks again,
-J
Hi, I see that CalBay anounced their new website. When I went to look at it, there was no content, just a black page with a blue square if you click on the middle. Can anyone see any content on the site? (I scanned the posts from today and did not see any discussion of this, I apologize in advance if I did miss something).
Thanks in advance,
-J
Can they show un-issued shares as an asset on the books?
-J
Thanks it! Do we know that the MONA and GLCC MM's are not solicited by the companies?
-J
Thanks!
-J
Hi it, do know what section this rule is in?
Thanks in advance,
-J
Possible scenario and you may very well be correct for these issues. But if you look at the regulations, "T" can cover more "misses" in the system. We had a general discussion on this on this or the GLCC board. There is still some difference in opinion as to the cases that the brokers actually use this for.
-J
The sale was recorded or posted outside of the normal trading hours and system for whatever reason. These occur pretty regularly here.
-J
I still don't know who, but it does feel like someone is manipulating MONA and GLCC, they are tracking each other! Maybe this is a coincidence, but when these go down it is pretty linear and holds pretty well within a tight range without the typical bumps / variations in the graph.
-J
LOL, Captain, I did mention "other associates as well" ).
-J
Post Unavailable
Additional Information
My issue with the Company is not so much that they increased the A/S (as long as they use it for aquisitions that will double the value of the company) as it is with the fact that they explicitly stated that they were not going to increase the A/S and then did it a little over a week later with no prior information that they were going to do it or an explanation as to why they "changed their mind"!
-J
As many know, I have tried to remain optimistic about GLCC. This current sequence of events is so disturbing that I will not even try to find an explanation for the apparent actions of the company any more. Why would they destroy the confidence that was starting to build in this stock? Here is an E-mail I sent to the IR and copied the Nevada Secretary of State on:
----
September 5, 2008
Investor Relations
Good Life China Corporation
Sir or Madam:
I am currently a shareholder of Good Life China Corporation (GLCC.pk). I am very concerned about recent news and actions from the company. I have attached PR information issued from GLCC on August 25, 2008 regarding an acquisition and intentions regarding the share structure. This PR clearly states that they do not intend to increase the authorized shares for GLCC. Now, less than two weeks later the authorized number of shares has been increased from the 500,000,000 to 985,000,000 per the Nevada Secretary of State’s Web Site. This was done without any announcement or explanation. This sequence of events, taken in context with previous information from the company is very disturbing and on the surface appears to follow a pattern of intentionally misleading shareholders. As you are aware, the share structure of a company has a direct effect on how investors view the company and therefore a direct effect on the share price.
If the Company intends to explain this as a business necessity, are they so inept that they were not aware of this a week ago? Also, after issuing information that they would NOT increase the authorized number of shares why did they not modify this with additional information when they found out?
This is a very unfortunate series of events as confidence in was starting to build in GLCC and will now be seriously deteriorated.
I thank you for your attention and await your response in this matter,
-J
Thanks Phrozt, this is intersting to follow.
-J
Hi wildcard, when I asked E*Trade they stated that the Company (GLCC) had to submit paperwork to do this. Someone else posted that the IR had told them that they only needed to call the broker and request that the restriction be lifted. (Doesn't seem to work with E*Trade).
Does anyone remember who posted that response from the IR?
Thanks,
-J
Disclaimer: All comments and information that I have presented or alluded to are simply "My Humble Opinion". I am not a professional trader.
Hi foxtrade, as far as we can tell , none of the Divvy's have been un-restricted.
-J
Hi cbuzz, this is what I have for the TA:
Filomena Nucaro
Senior Administrative Assistant
Heritage Trust Company
Fastcorp Management Ltd.
Phone: 416-363-1240
Fax: 416-864-0175
email: queenfil2004@yahoo.ca
She resonded fairly quickly to my inquiry.
-J
Disclaimer: All comments and information that I have presented or alluded to are simply "My Humble Opinion". I am not a professional trader.
Good questtion. Doesn't it depend on how it is sold?
-J
That is what I remember from when I looked into them earlier, but I will try and find my reference. The quick definitions talk about after hours trades as JB was indicating.
I will look tonight, at least for myself as now I am questioning my memory.
-J
My misunderstanding then, I thought that any trade outside of the computerized system at any time during the day would be reported on a Form T.
-J
I thought a "Form T" report could represent a trade that occured at any time during the day?
-J
Thanks Phrozt! I, for one, appreciate the explanation.
-J
Disclaimer: All comments and information that I have presented or alluded to are simply "My Humble Opinion". I am not a professional trader.
I am guessing that GLCC is not contributiong much, if any money to pursue the lawsuit. I believe that it is Minamars mess if it really moves forward.
-J
You can check, but I think it is the "ex-date" that counts, not the date the broker added them.
-J
Hi it, I think that means they can take ANY option they choose from the list since none were excluded.
-J
It appears that Garr Winters has been demoted to an "Associate, Advisor" and that Wenpeng Gui, VP Bus. Affairs would be over him per this listing.
-J
Post Unavailable
Additional Information
That's a million dollar question, in my humble opinion.
-J
I wrote the TA today, requesting information on the share structure with specifics about the 225,000,000 shares that were in escrow, here is the response from Filomena:
The authorized is 450,000,000.
The outstanding is now 371,089,892 of which 130,181,794 are restricted.
As for the escrow shares you will need to speak with Mr. Garr Winters of Good Life. You may reach him at garrw@myway.com
I have sent a follow-up E-mail to Mr. Winters regarding the shares that were in escrow.
-J
I am all for that! Does this mean you are predicting a high of 0.06 on the next run?
-J
Post Unavailable
Additional Information
Isn't Garr the common denominator on these?
-J
Very funny it, but why would the
Government there give up any control it didn't have to?
BTW: Chairman Mao just turned over in his tomb, "Ho Chi Min" was Vietnamise! LOL )
-J
Well as much as you can beleive the PR's. If you review them it talks about the Chinese Government's ownership in several. It has been pointed out that this is the norm in China, but I think that the government gave them seed money as well (this was from one of the web sites that was translated).
-J
Hi alien, I beleive that China's ownership is through Asia Pacific Corporaion which owns more than 10% of the stock.
-J
Hi Purdue, for whtat its worth, I still have to call E*Trade.
-J
Didn't someone know someone going to the Olympics? If so, have they heard anything, yet? Just searching for something more than speculation.
I gotta go for know, good luck,
-J
My point is that they were wrong before, so they could be again. Is this bad? YES, of course its bad. The main problem is that we lack verifiable information in general. The majority of the arguments on this board would not exist if that were not the case. This is what is bad here.
-J
We are all in a world of hurt, because the TA has been wrong and corrected themselves before.
-J