Replies to post #124538 on Bancorp International Group Inc (fka BCIT)

[bobbybdb]

Janice, Why don't you give us an up date on the SEC action you speak of .

[TEX]

I wondered about that, too.

[500_and_Long]

the world is full of wonders isn't it LOL

[molson_ice1]

Why bother bringing that up? They should reply to the SEC in a formal manner within the 10 days. Then when Energy Source files the SEC will simply drop that "litigation". IMO!

[kruy]

I wonder too who wrote that?....another third party PR??..like the last one?...that Megas claimed was "unauthorized".

Also...seems whoever wrote this did not learn anything from the last "Megas" letter to Burns/SFC.
Diss'ing Burns and the SFC is one thing, but diss'ing the SEC/DTCC in public is another. Seems the author does not realize Megas NEEDS the SEC and DTCC to approve and accept what is IN the filings, assuming Megas does file.

According to an email I just recieved from Burns..that is the position the SFC takes also...Megas must respond and file..and the SEC/DTCC will determine if they accept Megas's filings and let BCIT trade. The SFC is not siding or pushing for the SEC/DTCC to make a decision in favor of BCIT..that is the SEC/DTCC's business and they are the "professionals" in this matter as Burns put it.

I'm guessing today's PR just lowered Megas's chances somewhere below a snowballs chance in hades.

[XV19]

If a lawyer wrote that PR, they should be fired. The grammar/punctuation/run on sentences are atrocious. A first year English Major would have done better. The PR gets the point across just fine..but, sheesh..it's brutal on the language arts ;)