|
|
Post by John Winston Lennon O'Boogie on Aug 1, 2015 7:48:10 GMT -5
reverse merger or reverse split ?? reverse merging with what? reverse split. just cuts the number of shares down. when i first heard cmkx had 800 billion way back when, i anticipated a reverse split eventually. ok, just asking....perhaps symantecs are tripping me up 100 Billion locked away.. How many taken away from the insiders..? How many WILL be taken away from EDWARDS..? How many were payed for services never render..? How many taken away from UC and Family for scamming this stock...? How many given for Stock dividend..? ( 3 for 1 splits ).. We could be down to 100 Billion shares or less. Or maybe 700 Billion Short + 100 Billion to trade... JMHO |
|
|
|
Post by vulcanized crawler on Aug 1, 2015 10:20:04 GMT -5
that works for me. i wana keep my big number entact and smile all the way to the bank.
|
|
|
|
Post by John Winston Lennon O'Boogie on Aug 1, 2015 11:13:35 GMT -5
that works for me. i wana keep my big number entact and smile all the way to the bank. Looks like Steve may just do that.. With the rest of the TEAM of cause..  |
|
|
|
Post by imSINGLEruRICH on Aug 2, 2015 9:56:21 GMT -5
Mullah says......
SK said ...
"We need 200+ million just to return money originally invested without interest."
WOW?!?! ... let's talk numbers!
If the company's investment into the Oil & Gas Biz returns 1 MILLION DOLLAR ROI per MONTH, it will take atleast 200 months or roughly 16 1/2 years to recover FULL ROI, not accounting for the original investment and operating costs plus company operational expenses (lawyers, management, etc.).
At 2 MILLION per MONTH ... 8 1/4 YEARS
At 10 MILLION per MONTH ... 16 1/2 MONTHS or 1 YEAR 4 MONTHS
At $50 a BARREL it takes 20,000 BARRELS to produce $1 MILLION
DO YOUR OWN MATH ... I DON'T SEE IT HAPPENING.
PRIDE84 ...
|
|
|
|
Post by imSINGLEruRICH on Aug 2, 2015 10:07:07 GMT -5
drillbit
DIAMOND JEDI WARLORD
Post by drillbit on 19 hours ago
For any one, or any entity, to sue for slander, it has to be proven beyond any doubt that the defendant is not factual and willfully trying to cause damage to said person and/or company.
If SK is referring to me as the naysayer when talking about legal action, he may want to rethink same as I'm no shrinking violet that just dropped into the business world. QUESTION: Why is the man even concerned about posters that have opposing views to his? The man should be focused on business and not posters. I think he reads the boards even though it's been suggested that others have reported those posts to him. Why should he care either way IMO. Perhaps he has never had a BOD that disagreed with his ideas.
Last but not least his terminology in the last webinar regarding O&G is one of a neophyte IMO. Reworking old wells and refracing them is tricky business and usually does nothing because gas pressure is gone and that is what brings oil to the bore. If water driven, lifting costs can be a real problem. I've reopened wells and refraced them only getting enough of an increase in oil to pay for rig time, water hauling and fracing.
|
|
|
|
Post by John Winston Lennon O'Boogie on Aug 2, 2015 10:32:57 GMT -5
There you have it people, some posters with some Neg options.. One should do the math with the right amount of shares in the float and the other shouldn't worry if he or she isn't worried..  |
|
|
|
Post by imSINGLEruRICH on Aug 2, 2015 10:43:55 GMT -5
Shaking my head We all know who this "lady" is that SK referred to....... So the blame gets shifted to her for the total loss of the Can-Cal deal?? This lady also talks about aliens, ears falling off and a host of other far out things. It does not mean her tales of stuffiums are true??... I will assume that SK surely must have some kind of hard PROOF that "she" is the reason ..the deal fell through?? Then again, maybe better not to assume anything in this saga. If all he has is her say so.. it would really leave me wondering about this statement and a host of others?? Also would leave me wondering what the real reason was for the collapse of the deal?? And just who all fingers should be pointing at and why the attempt deflection ?? Just how many deals, cases or contracts could be lost or affected by any anonymous person calling, texting or emailing any old "information" at all?? Seems to me..... that good solid "proof" must be presented to make any kind of difference at all?? Just thinking out loud.....  Not liking "statements of threats"..... previous, present or future. Not the first threats aimed at some shareholders ...... Alpha male syndrome or not. Would like to see the "threats" left in the file drawer.. SINGLE |
|
