InvestorsHub Logo
icon url

martych

02/03/11 10:16 PM

#13931 RE: Headley Lamar #13929

They could hire someone to do a review of certain facts associated with the allegations and not call it an audit. It wouldn't be a bad thing at all but not likely to be doable until after the 10k is out. Another very credible thing would be to do a seconodary for a HK dual listing and hire a premier IB like GS to do it. The due diligence and venting out process is pretty compelling evidence. It again would take time but would put this issue to bed within a couple months.
icon url

Eagle1969

02/03/11 10:19 PM

#13934 RE: Headley Lamar #13929

No doubt the company will respond strongly Friday and utilize some
of the excellent suggestions here

But they must set up, temporarily, a "war room"" staffed during US trading hours to immediately respond to:

1. Citron 2 which we must believe/ assume will be worse than 1

2. After the CCME Friday refutation Muddy will respond that they stand by their claims and at that point they will throw some more bombs--that is their MO

icon url

pedro45

02/03/11 11:01 PM

#13951 RE: Headley Lamar #13929

Many people thought my suggestion that they publically verify the bank statements, even after the Citron attack, was not necessary.

At this point no measure they can take to substantiate the business is going too far.

Their backs are to the wall. Either they obliterate the short case with a massive, detailed, factual rebuttal that is beyond reproach, one that proves the shorts have purposefully distorted the truth and told outright lies, or the market will treat the stock as if it were radioactive. This is a death match and CME has been severely wounded.