Replies to post #87481 on Plastic2Oil Inc (PTOI)

[XenaLives]

I would expect the person making the accusation to give a specific, direct quote and to cite the minute mark in the recording.

The fact that the party making the accusation did not do that right away when his statement was challenged bothers me.

[jimmenknee]

okay-- let's try this again. Question: was the information given at the AGM regarding a/the PIPE/PP a lie or fib?

Your recollection:

"The only mention of private placements that I recall at the AGM was someone's (Baldwin, I think) statement that the possibility of future PPs depends on the company's operations and revenue stream. I do recall him saying that if revenues were sufficient, the company would not do a PP, but I also recall him saying that he could not rule out the possibility of a future PP."

The only audio/video that has captured nearly all information available: http://video.jbiglobal.com/JBI%20NEW.wmv

After listening to the whole video, the only time a/the PIPE/PP was mentioned begins 01:19:03 and ending at 01:19:26. The questioned offered was not recorded.

In my estimation, what you recall pretty much is what was said (I would add the hope to not have any more delays and a "but we have tried not to ...." [last garbled])

So the key use of "future" is what was conflicting with the then "present"

Timeframe in question:
Date of First Sale 2010-04-15
AGM: 2010-04-24

Without the benefit of the question, one may argue that it was speaking of a PIPE/PP #3.

What I would argue, is that is implausible given:

The understandings offered by AGM participants: "CFO provided financial report which everyone knows about. Hopes it's not necessary to have another Private Placement."
#msg-49393569

"Indeed, it seems highly unlikely there is another PIPE offering just yet. We are only a few days after the CFO stood up and told 450+ shareholders that JBI's cash position was good and that they hoped not to need another PIPE."
#msg-49628871

Additionally, given the response to the PP news break was denial: "anybody hear about a new offering of $4 shares available through JBI directly? Is this a new PIPE? How many shares are available?"
#msg-49563275

The most adament was probably: "I believe PIPE talk now is misinformation about JBII spawned elsewhere (clearly in conflict with what JB has stated during and at the conclusion of the just ended PIPE offering)...

just like the query about another JBII BOD member possibly being appointed from the IsleChem team...

purely bogus BS having nothing to do with JBII executing daily plans ---OR--- the implementing of the JBII long-term business plan.

Such rumors distract from the discussion on this board of more pertinent information about JBII... and serve to confuse those who do not follow the day-to-day changes that are happening quickly with JBII.

Of course, there would be no intentional reason for that, huh? Such rumors have no significant effect anyway since they are false from the start!"
#msg-49611910

This last post and the following then link into the reasoning given for the CFO to having to "not tell the truth":

"If I recall correctly, when JB answered the question about when another PIPE might be needed...he responded that the PPS might have to reach around $18 first...I don't recall that he commented on any price for the PIPE itself...most likely would be at a discount tho IMO."
#msg-49640102

So to answer question #1. Definitively it was an untruth.

Which then brings us to the next question, was he not allowed to discuss the PP at the AGM (so as to define the type of untruth)?

Here the answer is a little harder to define. Some argue Regulation FD prohibits. I cannot find specific language that prohibits, but there is some referencing of solicitation issues which could logically cause a pause for concern as well as the potential jeopardy placed on the placement status and exemption benefit.

http://tinyurl.com/25ab23u

On the otherhand, JBI itself has set a precedent of at least partial public disclosure before the 1st PP was finalized/filed.

"John Bordynuik I am not allowed to comment on the PIPE. I can state (as stated in the PR) that shareholders have not been diluted as a result of financing. As well, I am not allowed to change the price of stock once it is drafted and distributed in a private placement memorandum
December 21, 2009 at 12:14am"
#msg-45861284

"We can not discuss the PIPE in an open forum."
#msg-43870020

So clearly, JBI chose to reveal a PP but keep the terms and timeline (to close) out of the public forum.

(Duly noting in both cases, terms were revealed by shareholders/potential shareholders)

To sum it all up then-- I am going to go with the CFO prevaricating given he could have chosen to do a partial reveal (similar to PP #1) or neither confirm nor deny (as another poster suggested).

And BTW, the timing of the 2 events was under JBI control so any "boxing in" was self-imposed :-(