Replies to post #8209 on Pilgrim Petroleum Corp. (PGPM)

[mazmania]

Masc, my question was not intended because I am planning to take action - I work in the market a bit, i know the assumption of risk and veils of protection. I was trying to gauge whether or not Pinedo would make such a false statement, because if there was recourse mechanisms for the investors, then his optimistic statements are mot probably correct or genuine. If not, then - who knows if he has any incentive to accurately reflect his company...

[lazlotrade]

hmm - is/can be difficult to prove, but intent may be implied from circumstances and whether there is a motive to either deliberately mislead, or if one makes statements with reckless disregard for the truth or accuracy. when one has something to gain by having the statements believed (the $64,000 question), and has reason to believe people will rely on such statements (and reliance can be shown), and has some duty to be accurate (believe executive officers of a company have some fiduciary duty to ensure that if they make statements to his company's shareholders, they should not be blatantly inaccurate), there can be liability.

better questions are whether a ceo could get off the hook by claiming such were merely optimistic opinion/puffing rather than factual representations (question of fact as to how presented, and again, which goes back to motive), and ultimately whether any penny-holders have sufficient incentive and wherewithal to hold him accountable if his statements are fraudulent, or whether sec, et al, has enough interest to pursue it (probably biggest reasons that pinks company shills do not get called out - sec likely would not see this as high on its list of current priorities, unless barack or johnny mac is among the longs here). also, if actionable statements are being made by another in rp's name, and rp is aware of this, the fact that another is pushing the post button does not save him, if the statements themselves are otherwise actionable.

unless some totally and obviously misrepresentations are being made which would fit into the above categories, and unless responsible parties are collectible (e.g., to extent a respectable securities legal firm would take the case solely on contingency), might be unlikely that anything would be done - which pinks insiders know. please note that i am not accusing r.p. or anyone of improprieties, just kind of reviewing considerations in the event that improprieties are committed regarding representations concerning value of pink stocks, in general. i continue to hold in hope that we are being led to better days with this company.

laz

[downsideup]

I think if you wander by the SEC website and dig around until you find the page that shows enforcement actions, ie., trading suspensions, you will find that the large majority of the SEC actions are targetted to this end of the market. It is a fiction that there is some sort of a blank check handed to manipulators at this end of the market.

The problem for investors is that the reality that the SEC does have a fairly aggressive effort now in small stock scams... doesn't actually ever target getting your money back... instead of just putting the scams out of business. The SEC will take them down... and that doesn't help investors with money in the pool that gets locked out of participation in the market.