Replies to post #102817 on Laidlaw Energy Group, Inc.(fka LLEG)

[Renee]

Since LLEG's SEC Suspension the SEC has suspended approximately 500 other stocks. They have been busy.

With the SEC's Suspension of LLEG the SEC accomplished their primary goal which is to protect potential investors from experiencing investment losses. When the SEC has the resources to prosecute Laidlaw and its principals they can fulfil their secondary goal of punishing the principals.

With the very specific accusations against Laidlaw and the company's principals it is not likely that Laidlaw will be permitted to ever "come back with a vengeance".

The SEC's accusations are:

Laidlaw Energy Group, Inc. is a New York corporation based in New York. Questions have arisen concerning the adequacy and accuracy of press releases concerning the company’s operations, the accuracy of its financial statements, and stock promoting activity by the company.

[sunspotter]

"After all this time, does anyone still think that Bart did anything illegal?"

Yes. Among several other breaches of Securities legislation, LLEG CEO Mike Bartoszek committed several serious scienters, a number of which were documented by me (both before and after the SEC suspension and the current ongoing SEC investigation) and others on this very message board.

It's not uncommon for the SEC to take 2 or 3 years to conclude an investigation and bring charges against the perpetrators. Bartoszek won't be able to relax for many months yet, which is exactly how it should be.

[DragonBear]

After all this time,

does anyone still think that Bart did anything illegal?

The more logical question is: Does anyone believe he did not do anything illegal?

If he did why wasn't he charged?

Per Note II in the S1:

The Company received subpoenas from the SEC on June 28, 2011 and March 28, 2012 requiring the company to provide documentation to the SEC and for designated officers to provide testimony to the SEC. The SEC has information that it believes tends to show that there are possible violations by the Company and its officers, directors and others with respect to certain applicable securities laws, including Section 5 and 17(a) of the Securities Act of 1933, as amended, Section 10(b) of the Securities and Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, and the related regulations.

There are two likely outcomes to this activity. Bart ends up in court, or a fine is levied, and the fine in itself is large enough to bankrupt the company. The second subpoena almost a year from the original suspension indicates this has gone beyond a simple refiling to correct a previous error.

I for one hope that Laidlaw comes back with a vengance.

Let's assume the SEC disappears, the stock magically gets up listed, and Bart exhales. What in the S1 indicates to you the company is worth more than 0.0001? What reoccurring revenue can be applied against a float of approx. 3B shares? There is none. They started with $1.2M of working capital. A claim by Chatsworth Securities for $615K, with $260K for the Susanville land lease. Of course our hero Mikey wants his $200K salary. Exactly how is this company suppose to come back with a vengeance? Go ahead, lay out your case using fundamentals based on information contained in the S1. Or are we hoping the current 75(?) bag holders would drive the PPS back up on speculation alone, trading with each other? Then again bankruptcy is just around the corner.