InvestorsHub Logo
Followers 48
Posts 2221
Boards Moderated 1
Alias Born 01/28/2013

Re: Jetta09 post# 23455

Tuesday, 06/30/2015 10:38:27 PM

Tuesday, June 30, 2015 10:38:27 PM

Post# of 24848

So the question is, which holds higher importance? Does the ceast and desist order rank higher over the losing appeal between SCRC and Ironridge. SCRC lost the appeal, but the SEC, an agency of the United States Federal Government, has an CEASE and DESIST Order against Ironridge. I think the federal regulators know exactly what Ironridge does and how it operates.


As alluded to in a prior post, it is still unclear whether this SEC Administrative Proceeding will have any impact at all on SCRC.

Remember, the Cease and Desist order only applies prospectively -- so this is of no benefit to companies like SCRC who have already been pillaged by IR.

The only avenue I see for SCRC to benefit is in the language at the end of the Administrative Proceeding where it stated that if the investigation concludes that IR is indeed guilty of all charges, that disgorgement of profits "may" be a possible punishment. So this is obstacle #1.

BUT, in order for this to even be possible, SCRC has to be able to prove that it (and possibly its shareholders as well) has been directly harmed by IR engaging in the exact behavior that the SEC is basing its case upon. So this is obstacle #2.

And so that brings us to obstacle #3, which, IMO, is the biggest obstacle of all: The fact that IR can easily prove that it never dumped any of its shares. The 13G filed just a few months ago clearly states this fact. So if IR never sold its shares...and maliciously selling shares to tank the sp is a specific action identified by the SEC as being central to the practices that IR is being charged with... ...then it may be that this SEC action against IR may end up being a non-event to SCRC (and us shareholders).

So think of it as needing 3 binary events to all fall in your favor. 1 out of 3 doesn't cut it. 2 out of 3 doesn't cut it. You need all 3. Basic math tells you that the probability of 3 50/50 events occurring in a specific outcome is 12.5%. Certainly possible, but nowhere near the likelihood to make it worth gambling that it will occur. And that is the best case scenario, IMO, because in reality obstacle #3 should be handicapped at well under a 50% probability due to the existence of that darned 13G.

So... ...that all being said, let's understand what could unfold IF all 3 obstacles above should unfold in our favor:

(1)
SCRC could go back to the Court and demonstrate that it was victim to federally proven illegal behavior by IR and seek indemnification against IR. BUT, understand that this does NOTHING to help or protect SCRC in the here and now. Until the SEC concludes its investigation and all three obstacles above can be shown to fall in SCRC's favor, there is nothing the current Court can do w/regards to the current case in which SCRC lost its appeal.

(2)
Although possible, it would be very unlikely for the Court to grant any suspension of its Order for SCRC to fork over additional shares to IR at the present time simply because SCRC filed additional pleadings pointing to the "possibility" of being a victim of "potentially" fraudulent behavior by IR. IMO, a court would need more certainty before reversing itself or otherwise suspending any of its own prior rulings. Could the Court do this? When it comes to litigation, anything can happen. But it would be very surprising to me if the Court did so and I believe the odds are quite low. Certainly possible but a long shot -- but again, this is assuming that SCRC can overcome the 3 obstacles above and can at least persuade the Court that it is a legitimate victim of the specific behavior outlined in the SEC action.


News like this is primarily fodder for unethical pumpers like the homophobic criminal JOSEPH ZAMPETTI and his fellow criminal CORE associates to hype and spin. The reality as well as the true probability of this resulting in rich rewards for shareholders is far different. As I've been saying, LEGITIMATE retail shareholders would do well to understand the CORE mantra:

Bad news is good news.
Neutral news is good news.
No news is good news.
Good news is the best news ever.