InvestorsHub Logo
icon url

uwlungman

04/29/06 1:48 AM

#205173 RE: jetfish #205171

jetfish. How long for "new rule or law" enactment?
This quote is from the article you posted--
"really don't see a way out of this for anyone naked short the company. And there are no grounds for the DTCC to "chill" trading - the CUSIP change is their prerogative, and if they want to do a one time non-CUSIP stock dividend, that is also within their rights as an issuer. There is no rule or law that requires them to do so within the DTCC system - the system that allows those shares to be hypothecated, and lent, or book-entried."
My guess is that we will see the DTCC enact some new rules or laws very quickly.


icon url

janice shell

04/29/06 9:51 AM

#205181 RE: jetfish #205171

Yawn. Bobo needs to get up to speed. That's been tried a million times and it never works.

This is significant in a way that I've never seen before. Why? Because they are going to do a public test of the system, and have the O'Quinn law consortium standing by to sue the crap out of the miscreants, should they attempt to game the system.

What CXN is proposing is simple - they are doing a one-for-one swap on their paper certificates, with a new CUSIP number and name for the newly issued shares.

But more significantly, they are issuing a special class of share that will not carry a CUSIP, but will have substantial future cash value. And you can only get it from the company.

Because it doesn't carry a CUSIP, the system can't hypothecate the shares - meaning that the brokers can't just ledger over some bogus D share IOUs, created out of thin air. Which means that every person that owns or buys CXN in the next few weeks will need to get their certificates from their brokers, and then contact the company, to get the new shares AND the D shares. No paper, no D shares. Simple.


Maybe you (and Bobo) should take a look at the company itself. The truth is that its fat substitute just hasn't caught on, any mroe than Olestra did years ago. The stock's significantly overpriced as it is.

Why do all these little companies think their stock somehow "deserves" to have a higher price, when their fundamentals simply don't warrant it?