shajandr,
Good post!
However, in this case, some of what you say is predicated upon an assumption with which I do not agree. For instance, you pointed out that, "Disgorgement does not go to the company, as the company was not the injured party - SOME of the investors were." You assume that the company, and the investors, are mutually exclusive entities. That's easy to understand, in most cases, but it's not true in this case, due to the manner in which the SEC chose to administer this case.
Specifically, I'm referring to the company's announced share buy-back of over 500 million shares, which would have left the OS in the 700 million range. The TA data supports the company's claim, based upon my review of the Transfer Journal.
Consider that there were 28 numbered certs in Cede's name at the time of the switch from Olde Monmouth to WorldWide. Half of those certificates, representing most of the Cede shares, came from certs issued to hired stock promoters and entities related to the company.
Consider, for example, that two of those 28 certs were issued to Mark Overy and Target IR. Earlier issuances to them found their way into stock retirements reflected on the Transfer Journal, often by Flo Weinberg, Inc. Others of those 28 certs were from issuances to Romero Consulting (hired by the company), or from other related companies, such as A&N Enterprises.
I think most of those shares were part of the share repurchase. They were not accepted for cancellation, so they are beneficially owned by the company.
Then, there is the whole other aspect of damage caused to the company by the illegal decimation of its share price, which also affected its ability to pay creditors.
The clock is ticking, which I discussed in one of my filings last month, and which you pointed out a couple of days ago. Yet, the subject of share ownership remains unresolved, and not even the required listing of shareholders has been provided to the bankruptcy court. Why not?
AI
