InvestorsHub Logo
icon url

lurker27

08/19/11 4:59 PM

#100317 RE: TenKay #100316

You hit the nail on the head. Bartoszek and his management team have kept silent on ALL issues, not only those of concern to the SEC. Many of the concerns raised by shareholders on this board could be easily answered by LLEG without risk of antagonizing the SEC. The problem is that they would, for the first time, have to be honest with those answers. That is new territory for Bart and his gang, so, they decide to keep silent. For them, silence is better than the truth. And for those who defend Bartoszek, the only defense is "show me the link", or "show me documentation", when they know full well that no link or documentation is available--thanks to Bartoszek and his silent running.

Again, it doesn't take more than common sense to see what has happened here. Occam's razor has been proven to be true, over and over again, for many centuries. In a nutshell, it tells us that all things being equal, the simpler explanation is most likely the correct one.

My contention is that Bartoszek and his cronies broke rules and the SEC caught them. The stock was banished to the Greys where suspended companies go to die. And no "link" or "proof" has been given to show even a single suspended company returning to the pinks, let alone uplisting.

The defenders would have us believe that LLEG was unfairly targeted by the SEC and that Bartoszek's only issue was a cartoon and a website, per Bartoszek's own interview. They would also have us believe that any day now LLEG will emerge from the Greys and skip the Pinks alltogether, and uplist directly to the OTC market. I could go on forever listing the ridiculous claims made regarding the LLEG resurrection, but I think I have made my point.

So I ask, in the absence of "links" and "proof", which explanation sounds the simplest?

icon url

DragonBear

08/20/11 4:17 PM

#100326 RE: TenKay #100316

Yep... that is right when NO DATA IS PROVIDED

I've always chuckled when the words of DUE DILLIGENCE are used to thunder rebuttal against all posts unkind to LLEG. Next best thing to: DUTY! HONOR! COUNTRY! As you state it's sort of difficult to perform DUE DILLIGENCE when data is lacking.

I'd like to see an example of DUE DILLIGENCE applied to New Bedford. Where the result of any DUE DILLIGENCE should be the answer to the question: How much accrued value will this project add to the common stock? Try to find any figure to calculate against for that project. Exactly how much has been invested? How much revenue will come from the heating plant? What is the stated anticipated range for revenue for LLEG after the plant is upgraded to generate electricity, with a PPA in hand? What's the timeline for the project? For the poster who always shouts about DD... have a stab at it. Go ahead and find where management published any specific information to generate the numbers to crunch. Without any data, there are no fundamentals to do DUE DILLIGENCE against. And the magical words, don't sound so powerful or magical.