News Focus
News Focus
icon url

EarnestDD

05/15/07 10:05 PM

#267092 RE: Ragz #267091

You are wrong as usual Red.
Go read the OSC documents.
They are pretty succinct in saying that Sulja was offside with the Ontario Securites Act.
You want to distribute securities in Ontario you have to comply with their act.
And the use of the nominee accounts in the hands of citizens of Ontario, in the Province of Ontario was a clear violation of the Act.
Go away and try again RED.
imo
icon url

Ragz

05/15/07 10:09 PM

#267093 RE: Ragz #267091

NOT ILLEGAL SHARES!!!! JOURNALED!!!! THRU COMPANY BY LAWS!!

Does SULJA not have a registered office or agent?

Does SULJA not have other office's that the CORPORATION MAY MAINTAIN oher office's as the board of director's may from time to time appoint or as the business of the corporation may require.

Interesting???

IMHO

Ragz
icon url

Userdoozer

05/15/07 10:36 PM

#267101 RE: Ragz #267091

ragz, you are kidding right?

why don't you read the invention document as a whole

stop this nonsense

maybe this little phrase might show how it is not compared to the nominee trading accounts that were trading through brokerage firms:


"...Advantageously, the system of the present invention does not require a concomitant full-service brokerage account, and does not require real-time access to employee demographic information. In this way, the system can accommodate an unlimited number of participants and sponsoring employers..."