InvestorsHub Logo
icon url

schap

01/03/13 2:42 AM

#112488 RE: OTC_Pink_Picks #112486

If this is real it is huge in this process
icon url

isee1

01/03/13 2:44 AM

#112489 RE: OTC_Pink_Picks #112486

I agree,if this is real (I think it is) WATCH OUT:)$$ JMHO GLTA

Oh and there's no one to impress right now,we are grey----keep watching;)


SRGE
icon url

schap

01/03/13 4:06 AM

#112497 RE: OTC_Pink_Picks #112486

Where did this pic come from?
icon url

isee1

01/03/13 4:49 AM

#112503 RE: OTC_Pink_Picks #112486

This is huge,GLTA :) (seabreez also)
icon url

fh6282

01/03/13 5:42 AM

#112507 RE: OTC_Pink_Picks #112486

Wow, this is HUGE, SRGE$$$
icon url

mc67

01/03/13 6:13 AM

#112509 RE: OTC_Pink_Picks #112486

I believe this is the 6th and last page what's on the 5 pages before it ???
icon url

BillEvans80

01/03/13 7:59 AM

#112522 RE: OTC_Pink_Picks #112486

So much for confidentiality. That voids that agreement.
icon url

ecommceo

01/03/13 8:25 AM

#112530 RE: OTC_Pink_Picks #112486

WOW!!! Where do you get this? Shorties are in some big trouble.

KING
icon url

Palo

01/03/13 8:27 AM

#112531 RE: OTC_Pink_Picks #112486

Fantastic
icon url

pitboss22

01/03/13 9:11 AM

#112550 RE: OTC_Pink_Picks #112486

Your fake "evidence" signature block is totally meaningless as the SEC has already seen that and dismissed it as Southridge itself already proved below.

On Dec. 28, Southridge put up a statement on its website which stated, "The Company would also like to express that documentation regarding the engagement with Kinross was on file with the SEC prior to the December 26, 2012, news release."

There are only two possibilities here. Either southridge lied or they gave their "documentation" to the SEC PRIOR to Dec. 26. If they didn't lie about giving the "documentation" to the SEC, then the SEC had Southridge's "documentation" prior to making their decision on Dec. 28. If, on the other hand, southridge lied about providing the "documentation" to the SEC, that makes the whole question of documentation a moot point.

On Dec. 28, having reviewed Southridge's "documentation", the SEC issued an Order of Suspension of Trading against Southridge. That order gave the following reasons for the suspension.....

"...because of questions regarding the accuracy of statements made by
Southridge in press releases to investors concerning, among other things, the company’s
business operations and arrangements, including certain claims regarding a joint
partnership
and an arrangement to obtain funding and to change the listing venue for
Southridge stock
."

The SEC had two days to review the "documentation" provided by southridge and they rejected it. The SEC does not issue suspension orders lightly, as stated in the SEC Bulletin on Suspensions....

"The SEC is mindful of the seriousness of suspensions, and carefully considers whether it is in the public interest and for the protection of investors to order a trading suspension."

"The SEC suspends trading in a security when it is of the opinion that the suspension is required in the public interest and to protect investors. Because a suspension often causes a dramatic decline in the price of the security, the SEC suspends trading only when it believes that the public may be making investment decisions based on a lack of information, or false or misleading information. A suspension may prevent potential investors from being victimized by a fraud."

It only matters that the SEC has investigated and judged Southridge and suspended them and relegated them to the grey market. The SEC's investigation found NO wrongdoing by KGC.

Southridge attempted to victimize and blackmail Kinross. They picked the wrong company to attack. { 8^D