InvestorsHub Logo
Followers 508
Posts 76341
Boards Moderated 19
Alias Born 10/14/2009

Re: Cassandra post# 26059

Wednesday, 01/28/2015 9:15:44 PM

Wednesday, January 28, 2015 9:15:44 PM

Post# of 88811

The whole venture is an abuse of the Section 3(a)(10) exemption from registration and likely massive fraud with false and misleading press releases to pump the stock so that the newly-issued free-trading shares can be dumped. I would not be surprised to see SEC action in this matter.



This is what I call a Section 3(a)(10) exemption hijacking, as the exemption as written into law by Congress was intended to relieve "bona fide" debt obligations.

I cannot fathom how any forward-looking operations can be considered bona fide debt owed, although I have recently seen this maneuver attempted by another company we are both familiar with.

In this instance even private individuals are the recipients of shares that are not restricted from directly free trading in any fashion.

For what is my question?

The shoddy language in the Section 3(a)(10) exemption has me doing the Linda Blair dance move in double time.

I cannot fathom in any fashion how any of this constitutes bona fide debt owed to anyone.

https://app.box.com/s/833u9k6u6n81p8ejzc83t11vcp02kx3x

https://app.box.com/s/3zjz7smtranwias5lhrlvurhnpf3d6nf