Shearson Financial Network (fka SHSNQ)

[ib12u]

Feeling "CLEAR" by a hunch is not the same as having it stated in writing.

The company made NO mention of the shares being cancelled until "AFTER" the fact.

"Inside" knowledge of the shares being cancelled were known as early as febuary/2009.

But that was not made available to investors until June/11/2009 "Last day of trading" before being delisted june/12/2009.

The statements given from SHSNQ/SHSN, be it in PR's or Sec filings made absolutely NO mention of share cancellation until the last day of trading before being delisted.

Investors didn't have a chance.

By the way;

Remember this PR?

Shearson Financial Network Inc. Emerges From Bankruptcy,

SAN FRANCISCO, May 7, 2009 /PRNewswire-FirstCall via COMTEX/ -- SHSNQ | Quote | Chart | News | PowerRating -- Shearson Financial Network Inc., a financial services holding company that conducted diversified mortgage banking and brokering operations (Pink Sheets: SHSNQ), announced today that it successfully emerged from bankruptcy on May 7, 2009. On February 25, 2009 the United States Bankruptcy Court "Confirmed" Shearson's First Amended Joint Plan of Reorganization.

now ask yourself, does the above sounds like they're canceling shares? -Does it even SAY IT?

Check their SEC filings, you wont find it there either.

"get over it" is all you can come up with?

It wasn't mentioned until AFTER the cancellation commenced.

So at what point was it "CLEAR TO YOU"?

Besides, people say all kinds of things in forums and chat rooms, whether true of false.

But the above is in "PRINT", respectfully. Rather than by some typer who's just passing through.

Only a fool would run from post to post buying and selling to keep up with all the "opinions", "hearsays", thoughts and emotions mucked from everybody who's anybody.

If SHSNQ/SHSN had disclosed their "Canceling of shares" in a timely manor DURING or immediately AFTER bankruptcy and investors held on through that period, then your point need not be made as there would be NO arguments, for the BLAME would land squarely in the laps of those who didn’t sell after being forewarned BY THE SOURCES in question.

But such didn't happen, therefore your rebuttal is mute.