Replies to post #345732 on Spongetech Delivery Systems, Inc. (fka SPNGQ)

[cowtown jay]

Did the FTD's disappear in October 2009? If so, why was SpongeTech one of the 95 companies affected by a one week lift of their global trading locks, which was done to allow for the clean-up of "Aged Fails" in August 2011?

Also, as I reported to Judge Bernstein after reviewing the Blue Sheets, there were significant and sustained violations of RegSHO concerning short sales of the company's stock. These sales would also have skewed the RegSHO numbers, but in the opposite direction.

There was also the matter of a one billion share deposit into a DWAC account, which could have subsequently had a huge impact on the actual OS total, as I also detailed to the judge.

In addition, members of the stock distribution network sold their shares very quickly after receiving them, often within days of the purchase. Are you suggesting that those shares were sold before delivery?

If the share issue is so cut and dried, why wasn't a list of shareholders ever presented, as required by law, to the bankruptcy judge? Why have we had to wait so long for the company's lawyers, who authored the opinion letters, to be tried?

[cowtown jay]

"Do you also remember that 5 days after SPNG was suspended, they dropped off that list? How exactly did those fails disappear, when the stock was not trading?"

My focus on the RegSHO list was on the fact that we were on it, when the SEC suspended trading. I never even looked at how long we stayed on the list after that.

So when you said that SPNGQ dropped off the list 5 days after the suspension, I was trying to recall why "5 days" rang a bell for me. I found it, just now:

"In late October 2008 the SEC updated Regulation SHO requiring that all short sellers must locate, borrow and deliver any shares they have shorted, no exceptions, by T+3 settlement date. If not, a buy-in must be forced by the broker dealer that the short seller transacted through by the opening of the market on T+4. Since a company first appears on the naked short list when short sellers have been failing to deliver for 5 consecutive trading days, SPNG should theoretically never be on the naked short list again."

http://www.reuters.com/article/idUS133411+31-Aug-2009+BW20090831#5me1vLWw4plOJTEx.97

There were no failures to deliver for 5 consecutive days.

But, I wasn't really satisfied with that, so I kept looking. I found that the OTC may have discontinued displaying SPNGQ data BECAUSE of the suspension. Another reason may have been because of a lack in adequate current information. Such as a list of shareholders?

http://www.otcmarkets.com/stock/SPNGQ/quote

Again, SpongeTech still had failures to deliver two years after this.