|
|
Post by christopherl on Aug 29, 2007 8:23:50 GMT -5
The company was revoked for non compliance. Usually that means no audited financials, no filings to keep investors informed yada yada yada.
Ok the company has thrown the garbage out and is going after them now.
The company has been susepended/revoked from trading for almost 2 years. Well the 2 year anniversary is coming up.
So how hard is it to trade again?
The company has valuation now cause CMKM is holding a 45m cert from Entourage and current market value is approximately $5.5 million or so. This does not even put into account future value. So there is your valuation to trade again.
Next 2 years of audited financials. How hard can that be, they should be able to put those together on a thingytail napkin.
So is it really that hard to trade again?
While thinking about this practice K.I.S.S. and let me know some of your thoughts.
|
|
|
|
Post by soonerlew on Aug 29, 2007 8:30:45 GMT -5
K.I.S.S. hasn't applied to cmkm so far chris. Has it? It would be great if it were so simple, however, I find it hard to believe. I would think the lawsuits would all have to be dealt with also. Who would want to invest in a company that has so many law suits going and probably more that will evolve from this......Your thoughts please........
|
|
|
|
Post by christopherl on Aug 29, 2007 8:41:41 GMT -5
K.I.S.S. hasn't applied to cmkm so far chris. Has it? It would be great if it were so simple, however, I find it hard to believe. I would think the lawsuits would all have to be dealt with also. Who would want to invest in a company that has so many law suits going and probably more that will evolve from this......Your thoughts please........ sooner, The lawsuits are from the company on past management and their business associates and friends. This would tell me a potential investor that this company is cleaning house and possibly has potential, that is me thinking of course. But the question and that is why I am using the K.I.S.S. program here is how hard is it to trade again if they become compliant? Isn't that why they were suspended in early 2005? Isn't this why they had this hearing in 2005? And isn't this the reason they were eventually revoked in 2005? Now if they become compliant what can really stop them from trading? |
|
|
|
Post by soonerlew on Aug 29, 2007 8:44:06 GMT -5
Good points, thanks for your answer. It appears nothing can hinder the trading again. Let's hope you are correct and this is a boon for the shareholders....
|
|
|
|
Post by christopherl on Aug 29, 2007 8:47:30 GMT -5
Good points, thanks for your answer. It appears nothing can hinder the trading again. Let's hope you are correct and this is a boon for the shareholders.... sooner, Let me throw this scenario out there too. The company has a list of bonafide shareholders but they do believe there are FTD'S out there. Also I still have electronic shares today and I know of many others that do too. So the company starts trading and all of a sudden the people that could not get the certs or the foreign investors want to sell but low and behold the brokers do not have any certs. Kind of interesting isn't it? What will the broker have to do now? |
|
|
|
Post by soonerlew on Aug 29, 2007 8:51:51 GMT -5
Isn't that where the forced cover appears, chris? Isn't that what Bill was already warned not to do at the hearing by the SEC? Correct me if I am wrong but isn't that stirring up the hornets nest? Making the SEC an enemy right at the start?
|
|
|
|
Post by christopherl on Aug 29, 2007 8:57:16 GMT -5
Isn't that where the forced cover appears, chris? Isn't that what Bill was already warned not to do at the hearing by the SEC? Correct me if I am wrong but isn't that stirring up the hornets nest? Making the SEC an enemy right at the start? sooner, Yes but hasn't the SEC stepped back in the last 2 years and admits to FTD'S (Not NSS of course) LOL in the market place today? The DTCC has already cleared themselves up with CMKM what if the SEC is saying it is now the brokers problems not ours? My point I am making here is if CMKM becomes compliant and the SEC stands in their way that hornets nest could be on the SEC at that point. Correct? |
|
|
|
Post by coachphilm on Aug 29, 2007 8:58:26 GMT -5
K.I.S.S. hasn't applied to cmkm so far chris. Has it? It would be great if it were so simple, however, I find it hard to believe. I would think the lawsuits would all have to be dealt with also. Who would want to invest in a company that has so many law suits going and probably more that will evolve from this......Your thoughts please........ sooner I think if allowed to trade again the real big push would be from those entities that are very short on the FTD side of this stock, therefore , it's my opinion it would run pretty hard while they cover, much higher than usual. So we really dont need to get new investors, just the ones that need to cover. imo coach |
|
|
|
Post by christopherl on Aug 29, 2007 9:03:53 GMT -5
K.I.S.S. hasn't applied to cmkm so far chris. Has it? It would be great if it were so simple, however, I find it hard to believe. I would think the lawsuits would all have to be dealt with also. Who would want to invest in a company that has so many law suits going and probably more that will evolve from this......Your thoughts please........ sooner I think if allowed to trade again the real big push would be from those entities that are very short on the FTD side of this stock, therefore , it's my opinion it would run pretty hard while they cover, much higher than usual. So we really dont need to get new investors, just the ones that need to cover. imo coach coach, Yes that "if" is very big but if the company is compliant cause that is why they were suspended that "if" becomes a bigger problem for the SEC. Can the SEC stand in the way of a company that has become compliant by the SEC'S own rules. Remember the SEC said you need to become compliant. |
|
|
|
Post by soonerlew on Aug 29, 2007 9:21:02 GMT -5
Thanks guys!!! All points appreciated!!! Food for thought is good.........It all sounds doable so let's hope this is what happens.....
|
|
|
|
Post by leonidas on Aug 29, 2007 13:46:33 GMT -5
chrisL~
It's not going to happen.
No one is going to invest in a company that has no offices, employees, business plan, and only ONE asset...shares of another company. That's not "valuation" at all, and certainly no reason to trade again.
For another thing, I would love to see an example of the SEC accepting financials produced through a "forensic audit".
To produce financials for every year since that phony Form-15 was filed, they'd have to make up, or guess at, a majority of the information since CMKM was never a real business with real operations in the first place.
Add to that, inexperienced "management" who is every bit as comical as the previous management was crooked.
You may like these Texas guys on a personal level Chris, but you are giving them WAY too much credit.
Answer this: Who was counting shares and extending deadlines while Urban and Edwards hid all the money and themselves? Who was that Chris?
|
|
|
|
Post by christopherl on Aug 29, 2007 16:09:51 GMT -5
chrisL~ It's not going to happen. No one is going to invest in a company that has no offices, employees, business plan, and only ONE asset...shares of another company. That's not "valuation" at all, and certainly no reason to trade again. For another thing, I would love to see an example of the SEC accepting financials produced through a "forensic audit". To produce financials for every year since that phony Form-15 was filed, they'd have to make up, or guess at, a majority of the information since CMKM was never a real business with real operations in the first place. Add to that, inexperienced "management" who is every bit as comical as the previous management was crooked. You may like these Texas guys on a personal level Chris, but you are giving them WAY too much credit. Answer this: Who was counting shares and extending deadlines while Urban and Edwards hid all the money and themselves? Who was that Chris? Actually Urban was still in charge of this company and there was nothing Bill Frizzell could do. Stop trying to make an accusation you cannot back up. As for trading Judge Murray said it herself in her brief. If they get their financials in order and file all the necessary forms to trade again there would be no reason to not allow CMKM to trade. Remember CMKM was revoked due to non compliance. |
|
|
|
Post by imSINGLEruRICH on Aug 29, 2007 18:04:30 GMT -5
Chris.... Wouldn't they have to file ALL missiing financials ,to become completely compliant with the SEC, from the time that the infamous Form 15 was filed back in July of 2003? Why only 2 years? I see your point in regards to the reason for being revoked.... CMKM was told to catch up with the filings and there would be no reason not to trade. OK.... but thinking of it in terms of the K.I.S.S. practice does not seem to cut it here. Some problems... imo They don't want us back on the market.... Most large brokerages reinforced this during the cert pull.... stating that they will not accept our CMKX certs back.... ya know kinda BLACKBALL us... maybe ?? There are much higher powers than KW & BF, who could put the lid on it. Here's a few billion problems 703,000,000,000 shares. ..seems that they would have to fix the share structure.... doing a r/s or a r/m.... regarding a r/s, my fear would be that a small stockholder would be left out to dry. Regarding a r/m....would there be any takers? If the share structure would remain the same... then what the heck kind of valuation would we need to justify it. As for Frizzell's statemnet," that they made the mess, let them clean it up"....... Can this be done without ramifications from the Sec? As Dr. D states " no co-operation from the SEC"........ never was and most likely never will be. They just want us to disappear. Although I would rather just be handed an ROI..and be on my way......my alternative would be..... Nothing I would rather see then the hedgies, MM's Brokers and whoever else is responible for the substantial FTD's/ NSS (per Frizzell )...cover on the open market & be forced to pay the pipers, better known as the CMKX shareholders. Do I believe this could happen....... not so sure. Imo.....The agencies SEC, DTCC et al... will do everything in their power to prevent this..... warning shots? threats of trading again? Lawsuits regaining claims and money.=Valuation.?.... could this be a ploy to force a hand?? So Chris,,,, in answer to your question...... "So is it really that hard to trade again?" ...imo....probably Single  |
|
|
|
Post by JoeRockss on Aug 29, 2007 19:21:16 GMT -5
Chris.... Wouldn't they have to file ALL misising financials ,to become completely compliant with the SEC, from the time that the infamouss Form 15 was filed back in July of 2003? Why only 2 years? I see your point in regards to the reason for being revoked.... CMKM was told to catch up with the filings and there would be no reason not to trade. OK.... but thinking of it in term of the K.I.S.S. practice does not seem to cut it here. Some problems... imo They don't want us back on the market.... Most large brokerages reinforced this during the cert pull.... stating that they will not accept our CMKX certs back. Here's a few billion problems 703,000,000,000 shares. ..seems that they would have to fix the share structure.... doing a r/s or a r/m.... regarding a r/s, my fear would be that a small stockholder would be left out to dry. Regarding a r/m....would there be any takers? If the share structure would remain the same... then what the heck kind of valuation would we need to justify it. As for Frizzell's statemnet," that they made the mess, let them clean it up"....... Can this be done without ramification from the Sec? As Dr. D states " no co-operation from the SEC"........ never was and most likely never will be. Although I would rather just be handed an ROI.....alternative would be..... Nothing I would rather see then the hedgies, MM's Brokers and whoever else is responible for the substantial FTD's/ NSS (per Frizzell )...cover on the open market & be forced to pay the pipers, better known as the CMKX shareholders. Do I believe this could happen....... not so sure. Imo.....The agencies SEC, DTCC et al... will do everything in their power to prevent this..... warning shots? threats of trading again? Lawsuits regaining claims and money.=Valuation..... could this be a ploy to force a hand?? So Chris,,,, in answer to your question...... probably Single I agree..There definitely are some hurdles, especially since past management won't give up all the past records of the company. I wonder how Bill and Kevin plan on filing accurately without those missing records. What if they were destroyed? What if some of those deep dark secrets on this company are gone forever? What then? |
|
|
|
Post by christopherl on Aug 30, 2007 13:11:09 GMT -5
imSINGLE & Joe,
The hurdles are not as hard as one might think.
Judge Murray in her brief stated that if the company became compliant this company could trade again.
Here is the problem with this cert at the moment. The Entourage Cert is in CMKM'S name but the claims are Emerson Koch's so who is the common denominator here with all these claims?
Emerson Koch.
|
|
