InvestorsHub Logo
icon url

Bob 1948

06/04/07 12:29 PM

#123091 RE: PeeVeeCee #123090

Scams everywhere. Neom could be one of them. Only my oppion.
icon url

tomtrav

06/04/07 12:30 PM

#123092 RE: PeeVeeCee #123090

sorry pal.

you can't squeeze blood from a stone.

the company is bankrupt and cornell will be paid well before there is any remaining value to distribute to aggrieved common shareholders.

the only hope would be piercing the corporate veil and going after the assets of management and the board of directors.

success here would require proving intent to defraud and would entail a massive discovery effort by the class' legal representation.

proving fraud AND piercing the corporate veil. good luck with that -- it so, so rarely happens even in blatant cases of fraud.


icon url

neom2006

06/04/07 12:37 PM

#123096 RE: PeeVeeCee #123090

IF a class action ever did happen, there is not even a question about what the result would be. IMO, Chas and company has been dragging this thing along so that they can cover their own a$$es in the even of a lawsuit. I would be shocked if any of the jeniouses (I know, its a joke) have ANYTHING of value in their own names. All in my opinion.
icon url

whattheheck3030

06/04/07 2:16 PM

#123114 RE: PeeVeeCee #123090

This class action suit cannot be simply against the company and the BOD, it would have to include promoters and those who 'acted and behaved' as promoters. The reason all must be included is simply this; the BOD will claim they are responsible for losses, but not for getting someone into or continuing to hold the shares. The promoters or 'agents that act as promoters' would claim they got people into the stock, but are not responsible for the losses created by the BOD. So, by including all those associated with the entity the judgement can be divided as the court sees fit, be it 80%/20% or 50/50 or 30%/70% or whatever. This is how things are done in Ontario, Canada. I recall one case I was involved in for a decade and we ultimately got the directors of a limited partnership and the promoters convicted of fraud; no cash came our way for another five years, and what did was small. But at least the promoters lives were ruined for ten years via stress and court associated costs - which made me feel better. From what I have received in PM, I can assure you that if the U.S. had our laws on this sort of thing, there would be some very concerned mouth pieces for NEOM hanging around here. This post is on topic, and discussing who should be involved in any suits against NEOM, thus I hope it is not removed.