InvestorsHub Logo
Followers 6
Posts 209
Boards Moderated 0
Alias Born 02/14/2009

Re: BigBucksFl post# 95238

Saturday, 06/11/2011 1:41:02 AM

Saturday, June 11, 2011 1:41:02 AM

Post# of 103302
No, he's right. Laidlaw doesn't own Ellicottville.

Barty's statement is still correct though. He said "his firm is still involved with the proposed power plant". He never said anything about owning it, the plant was proposed, never a reality, and with the ongoing litigation, he's still involved. Just not in the way it was depicted through the website, before it was removed, which is what the SEC's problem probably was.

Barty guilty of not being on top of his website & having outdated content: Yes
Barty deliberately leaving outdated content on his website in order to scam potential investors into thinking that we own more than we really do, hoping that the scam can pump the pps: No

Here the misunderstanding lies. More of a momo move, probably being bogged down with so many different tasks at the moment and not even thinking about the details on his site. I remember before the site was updated to give it a more modern, clean feel, the site wasn't touched or updated for what had to be at least a year. Outdated info, no updates.

Btw, here is the deed info for Ellicottville, click on owner info in left hand column to see current owners:

http://maps.cattco.org/Imate/propdetail.aspx?swis=043689&printkey=04600400010430050000


History of the deed says that Laidlaw never owned Ellicottville. It was transferred or leased to them at one point:

http://maps.cattco.org/Imate/quickstream.aspx?file=VOLLOCAL/T000065/043689046004000104300500000001.tif


Join InvestorsHub

Join the InvestorsHub Community

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.