|
Post by soonerlew on Jun 15, 2009 7:16:48 GMT -5
drchicostat DIAMOND DIGGER Re: Weekly Buzz Talk June 8 « Reply #132 Today at 12:49pm » Deb, Blackrock and Barclay deal in ETF's (EXCHANGE TRADED FUNDS). This is just a guess, but could Knight's derivatives liabilities be linked to Citigroup's purchase or swap of these funds in past dealings. I have been unable to locate a definite connection, but I'm still looking. I understand these funds can be shorted, same as stocks. drchicostat debintex DIAMOND DIGGER drchicostat, You might be right. Honestly, I was taking a GIANT leap out there when I mentioned Blackrock, it was pure speculation on my part. Watermermaid said BlackSTONE, but based on the other things she said and something I read in the NY Times a few weeks ago, BlackROCK made more sense to me. I have been following BlackRock a little because it has the world's largest Mining Fund. Here's what she said: 1. "BlackSTONE wants to sell off Citi" 2. "The source was a macro economist - adviser to president and princes". I don't think Blackstone is powerful enough to pressure Citi. Blackrock on the other hand is growing more powerful everyday (all over the world). Read this article in the NYTimes and it will give you a better idea why Blackstone came to mind when I read the two quotes above. When I look at this article and then think of their mining fund... well, it let's me dream a little! LOL www.nytimes.com/2009/05/19/business/19blackrock.html
|
|
|
Post by soonerlew on Jun 15, 2009 7:17:19 GMT -5
ShowMeTheMoney Mod Squad Jersey... Great find! If Roger Glenn turns out to be a good guy after all... could this be the reason he raised the AS to 800 Billion? e.g. To protect holders of CMKX securities that were fraudulently issued? Dont know... I sure wish someone would start talking. - Show in reference to rg... Fraudulent and Forged Certificates.— A very frequent case is that in which shares of stock of a corporation have been fraudulently issued, but in which such shares are in no sense an overissue. They have been issued without authority from the corporation, but are within the amount which the corporation has power to issue. A party taking with knowledge of the fraud, or of the circumstances giving rise thereto, is not entitled to the rights of a stockholder, and the certificate is void in his hands. Where, however, such certificate, though fraudulent in its inception, has reached the hands of a bona fide holder for value, and the number of shares represented by the certificate will not cause an overissue, the corporation will be held bound to make good such certificates to the extent of any shares owned by the company. Bona fide holders of such stock certificates are to be regarded as stockholders of the corporation and entitled to all the rights of such. Fraudulent stock certificates are not, however, certificates in legal contemplation and give no rights of their own force. The act of the corporation in issuing them, they having been accepted and acted upon in good faith by another, is deemed merely to estop the corporation from denying their validity.18 A corporation which has been induced fraudulently to issue corporate stock cannot, by subsequent ratification, bind stockholders who had no notice of the fraud. A corporation may be held liable in damages for a fraud of its officers in issuing stock, where it cannot be compelled to issue valid shares in place of those fraudulently issued, for the reason that this would cause an overissue of its capital stock. And generally speaking where one has expended money upon the faith of official certificates of stock issued by a corporation, he has a right to be indemnified, to the extent of his expenditure. So where certifi cates of stock in a company have been signed in blank and left with an official of the company to be used as needed, and the official fraudulently fills them up and puts them in circulation, the company will be liable in damages to a bona fide holder of such certificates for value. In many cases corporations have been held liable for damage caused by reliance upon the validity of fraudulent issues of certificates upon the ground that the negligence of the corporation has caused the injury. But it is only when a party holds a certificate to which are attached the genuine signatures of the parties who must sign to make it good, that the question arises as to whether or not the company is liable to him because of negligence, when the certificate is in fact false by reason of having been improperly or fraudulently issued. Where spurious stock is not an overissue, but is entirely within the powers of the corporation, its invalidity being caused merely by some irregularity in its issue, a stockholder may, by his acts, preclude himself from questioning the validity of the stock.* pg 219-221 tinyurl.com/moecn3[/quote]
|
|
|
Post by soonerlew on Jun 15, 2009 7:18:10 GMT -5
jfarn DIAMOND MINER Re: Spoke with David Kotz this afternoon « Reply #61 Today at 7:07pm » Show, let us stay on guard. Kotz said they are going after Glenn and he is within their scope.
|
|
|
Post by soonerlew on Jun 15, 2009 7:19:15 GMT -5
ShowMeTheMoney Mod Squad Re: Spoke with David Kotz this afternoon « Reply #62 Today at 12:39am » JFARN... I am... I still think this could go either way. e.g. Urban and Roger need their day in court to explain themselves. Of course, the SEC actually has to see this through and get them into court. We'll just have to wait and see what happens. - Show
|
|
|
Post by soonerlew on Jun 15, 2009 7:19:33 GMT -5
By: jboydwv 12 Jun 2009, 01:03 PM EDT Rating: Msg. 841598 of 841703 By: carquest44 02 Apr 2008, 03:12 PM EDT Msg. 696279 of 714049 (This msg. is a reply to 696258 by elvis-is-here.) Jump to msg. # elvis, Nothing as changed, it's just a bloody war......GOOD vs EVIL.....RIGHT vs WRONG! I had mentioned many many months ago that our foes are very formidable and well financed, as you all know by now since the war rages on. I absolutely believe in a positive roi. However i'm of the opinion that we need to hear from not one but two different enities(in pr form)before we can move forward. Have really must go now, take care all.
|
|
|
Post by soonerlew on Jun 15, 2009 7:19:53 GMT -5
By: l_broke_o 12 Jun 2009, 02:05 PM EDT Rating: Msg. 841600 of 841704 (Reply to 841597 by sportsman93306)
Jump to msg. # Yep sportsman, the people who ask the tough questions about cmkx have always been accused by the, I don't want to call them pumpers so I'll refer to them as the B.S. artists, as "bashers".
Rosencrantz and phatboy for example are not a bashers they want to see the proof, one way or the other.
These B.S. artists don't know how to handle someone who asks the tough questions so they reach into the "Basher" drawer and throw it out.
A question thrown around a lot is why are the REAL bashers here?
I'd also like to know why are these so called GURUS here, time and time again being wrong with their predictions. It's not like they're just off with their predictions. IT'S A PRETTY GOOD GUESS THAT THESE GURUS KNOW THEY ARE WRITING FALSE PREDICTIONS.....but why? Attention wwhhores or for evil reasons?
=Brokie=
|
|
|
Post by soonerlew on Jun 15, 2009 7:20:26 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by soonerlew on Jun 15, 2009 7:22:08 GMT -5
seagull Mini Mod Re: The Weekly Buzz June 8 « Reply #30 Today at 8:51pm » -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Salty's Theory www.zshare.net/audio/61327171e6c1b4d3/#Recap ...Salty ....6/13/09...... I think we are golden actually. I think that based upon the sting that happened... the white knights that have been involved in this... the major valuation that we have ... and the country not wanting to let uranium and oil slip through their fingers... I believe that Bob Maheu knew how to get us paid by getting China involved in this... so that China, US & Canada will be partners... and they used Citibank as the partner to pay us off based upon the fact that so much illegal was going on... Leman Brothers and Merrill Lynch were the main culprits.. Bank of American had to buy Merrill Lynch and was strong armed by Bernanke to do so... Merrill Lynch was big in this NSS... and what we got is ... depository receipts ... I feel it is right... We hold depository receipts and that is what Citibank said they are going to pay on... Our depository receipts are our certificates... they were borrowed by the borrowing pool...many of them x cleared... as Jefferies did... many unregistered shares sold through NevWest Securities ... when Citibank bought Knights derivatives and they never have repurchased them so they are still borrowed... we have depository receipts that were borrowed that need to be repurchased... in order to do that Citibank had to make a deal for the depository receipts in the form of preferred shares... those preferred shares will be converted to common shares this week and issued late July at a ratio of 7.30769... to receive shares of Citibank... worth about .48 per share... when Citibank gets $3.94, CMKX will be worth .54 per shares... I wasn't a big fan of Acca... but now I believe that Acca played a large part in all this to keep us together... They have given him enough info along the way have culminated in what I think right here... I think we will get shares of Citi... Citi will then do the conglomerate ipo ... they will underwrite the ipo with the blessings of the government because the government owns 34-36% of Citi........ our stock will be absolutely nondilutive ... because they have underwritten the largest conglomerate in the history of the world ... Citi's short squeeze will run ... they are trying to make it look as bad as they can... because it is fixing to run when it is announced.... great way to pay CMKX ...because it will be the liquidity of the stock market that pays us... then the actual trusts of some of the claims that had been sold will be released to us... so we will not only will we have shares of Citi worth the .48 and no telling what.... and will have the trusts released to us and we will have the rights offerings for the ipo which citi will make all our money back ...we are in partnership with China and Canada... we are in the stock play of a lifetime ... thanks Cameron for putting on the pressure for what you are going to do... because the bad guys are going to have to pay Question: Are you hearing anything about short term small payments... (paraphrased) Salty: I don't see small payments coming ... Citi will pay us... and the SEC will be off the hook ... then the rest of our trusts can be released... ~seagull « Last Edit: Today at 8:56pm by seagull » millionaires.proboards.com/index.....ad=26020&page=2 squeezebox Dr. Of Diamonds Re: Updated Daily!! RUMORS ....Believe em' or NOT! « Reply #143 Yesterday at 7:59am » -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Sounds like someone's cookin up quite the story to me, but then again what do I know! I guess at this point we can only hope Salty is right.
|
|
|
Post by soonerlew on Jun 15, 2009 7:23:28 GMT -5
bikinipro Mini Mod Gossip Column Queen Re: The Weekly Buzz June 8-13 « Reply #30 Today at 11:21am » -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- snifferpup Mod Squad ***** Re: Other Gossip, etc..6/8/09-> « Reply #154 Today at 11:40am » tigerherb: Earlier this morning 06/14/09, Richy said that his contact was hoping to talk to his contact this weekend to see if there was any new info. He repeated what they said previously "It Is Done" millionaires.proboards.com/index.....ad=26020&page=2 ironman Dr. Of Diamonds Re: Updated Daily!! RUMORS ....Believe em' or NOT! « Reply #145 Today at 6:00am » -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Looks like this web link is "done" too!
|
|
|
Post by soonerlew on Jun 15, 2009 7:25:01 GMT -5
By: rosencrantz2010 14 Jun 2009, 08:48 AM EDT Rating: Msg. 841784 of 841906
Jump to msg. # By: lowriderbill 21 Feb 2008, 06:34 PM EST Rating: Rate this post: Msg. 669690 of 841783 (Reply to 669679 by my69z) Jump to msg. #
Chris - I'll take that bet...
However, I'll be up front and tell you that I don't believe anything coming from Tyler and that they are holding up our movement forward.
I believe the following:
1) That CMKX will never recover any claims. 2) That CMKX has no right, title, or claim to the Entourage shares. 3) That CMKX won't exercise a reverse split. 4) That CMKX can't cancel any of the shares.
I believe the following will happen moving forward:
1) That funds collected from a forced buy-in were retained in trust. 2) A conversion to a new company will be offered to bonafides. 3) That the funds in trust will be used to offer a buyback. 4) That any remaining shares after a buyback will be converted. 5) That the new company is actually a holding company where any assets and claims that were supposedly stolen or misappropriated will be rolled into.
Chris, you know I repsect you and the research you've provided. However, the vast majority of the shares that were issued to insiders and friends have already been sold. They're not there to cancel anymore.
The one thing that stands out in my mind more than anything else is Tyler's concern for those that don't have certs. They've stated it in their updates and have talked about it since the cert pull. Who doesn't have certs? Retail shareholders? Brokers? Insiders? Affiliates of Tyler?
If there was no short and no forced buy-in was conducted then why doesn't everyone have certs? It should be as simple as requesting them from your broker. There are only a few reasons I can think of:
1) Certain folks didn't request certs during the timeline allotted where Nevada statute was complied with for notification. 2) Certain folks decided to leave their shares in electronic form even when directed by the company to pull certificates for distribution. 3) That the bankruptcy plan disqualified any unrighteous shares meaning those that were purchased under other than honorable conditions.
The beating of the war drums by Tyler against Urban is a complete joke. It doesn't take a year to serve someone in this day and age. In addition, why is it necessary to hire Trimbath for another audit unless someone isn't happen with the final list of bonafide shareholders provided by the Task Force? Finally, the ridcule by Tyler of otherwise good people makes me sick.
Your comments are always welcome although we may disagree:)
Lowriderbill
By: rosencrantz2010 14 Jun 2009, 08:55 AM EDT Rating: Msg. 841785 of 841906 (Reply to 841784 by rosencrantz2010)
Jump to msg. # this is THE THEORY the main posters on the CONGLOMERATE board believe. that is, bellingus, maverick1166, seatech, lowrriderbill and a host of others believe exactly what lowrider outlines in that post.
it's a good theory since it is at least feasible. it may not be true but it's one hell of a lot better than these other stupid theories involving citi bank, etc.
now you have to ask yourself, if the money was collected three years ago, when the cert pull was wrapped up, why haven't people been paid? and, if the money was collected and is sitting there waiting for us, why are there bashers still here bashing away? what is their motive? it can't be shorty doing the bashing since the naked short has been fixed according to lowriderbill's theory. so, if it's not shorty then who is bashing and why?
what is the holdup in paying out the money held in the trust fund? and if, as aladin said yesterday that some of that money is being used to pay TYLER, then if that is true then clearly CMKX has access to those funds and can use them however it thinks best. in other words, there is nothing stopping cmkx from paying us, even if it is nothing more than for them to return our initial investment, say, for example, an average price of .0003 per share.
|
|
|
Post by soonerlew on Jun 15, 2009 7:27:59 GMT -5
By: gusjarvis 14 Jun 2009, 11:02 AM EDT Rating: Msg. 841792 of 841906 (Reply to 841785 by rosencrantz2010)
Jump to msg. # rosen it is the f'ing simple man
we had fake shares, we took ourselves off the market, we forced the cover with the cert pull, many people waited months on end then finally got their cert showing they were paid for, those certs were paid for with iou's as were the other companies on the otc that were shorted, then the fed printed the trillions to pay off the iou's, and here we are.
end of story
in fact the sec already said they got together with the fed and the brokers who are in the class actions and covered the aged fails in 2006, well it was trillions and trillions weren't printed then, then came the bail out bill and again here we are, iou's now covered
By: rosencrantz2010 14 Jun 2009, 11:11 AM EDT Rating: Msg. 841794 of 841906 (Reply to 841792 by gusjarvis)
Jump to msg. # gus, yes, the first part of your description of what may have transpired is what lowriderbill and others, like yourself, have been saying for years.
my question is, if the money was paid by the broker to CMKX three years ago, why hasn't it been paid out to us? in other words, what is the holdup in paying us, or offering us the tender offer, or however you think it is going to be paid out?
if the money is sitting in a trust controlled by CMKX then all the contortions involving citi, the SEC, the fed, etc., etc., etc. makes no sense. if URBAN controls that money then why after three years isn't it being used to move us forward?
|
|
|
Post by soonerlew on Jun 15, 2009 7:30:19 GMT -5
By: rosencrantz2010 14 Jun 2009, 07:23 PM EDT Rating: Msg. 841858 of 841906 (Reply to 841795 by rosencrantz2010)
Jump to msg. # gus, all of what you say here shouldn't mean a thing to cmkx. if we have the money (that is, if shorty was forced to pay the company cash in order for the rest of us to get our certificates, then there shouldn't be any reason that anyone else can stop the company from doing what it wants with those funds.
if CMKX was able to FORCE shorty to pay the company cash starting back in late 2005 when the cert pull began, then the company obviously has the power to do what it wants with those funds now. if CMKX had the POWER to FORCE large brokerage houses to pay them cash then CMKX sure as hell has the POWER to tell the government that it now is going to pay out that cash to the people that were wronged back in 2003, 2004 and 2005.
you can't have it both ways. you can't, on the one hand, say CMKX forced the SEC, the markets and the biggest financial institutions in the world to pay them cash in 2005, and then turn around and argue on the other hand that CMKX doesn't have the power to pay out that cash in 2009.
get it?
|
|
|
Post by soonerlew on Jun 15, 2009 7:31:21 GMT -5
By: l_broke_o 14 Jun 2009, 07:40 PM EDT Rating: Msg. 841865 of 841906 (Reply to 841718 by rosencrantz2010)
Jump to msg. # LOL rosen, I never once thought you were on the wrong side of the cmkx tracks.
All I know is Urban is probably livin' the "Good-Life" while I have to work weekends.
-EL BROKE O
|
|
|
Post by soonerlew on Jun 15, 2009 7:32:17 GMT -5
By: sportsman93306 14 Jun 2009, 08:09 PM EDT Rating: Msg. 841869 of 841906
Jump to msg. # THOSE WHO WERE IN 'KNOW' ARE DISAPPEARING VERY FAST. LISTNER, DR DIAMOND, WILLY WIZARD, STERLING, MIKE 777, BELGIANS PEDRO 20040, ABGG,ETC NOW, BHOLLENEGG, BELLINGUS, SEATECH ETC DO NOT TALK ABOUT CMKX. I BELIEVE IT WILL DIE SLOWLY,THE BOARD IS ALREADY DYING. SPORTSMAN
|
|
|
Post by soonerlew on Jun 15, 2009 7:33:58 GMT -5
By: oil.ipo 14 Jun 2009, 08:31 AM EDT Rating: Msg. 841779 of 841906
Jump to msg. # If you hold a certificate, and you are a registered Long (Certified) then chances are that,- this is what has been settled on LONG ago and monies collected are in trust. Why complicate this matter with Citi receipts? I really do not care how they cover their behinds today. If it benefits CMKX shareholders in addition later on, then great. Possibilities of NS "phantom" cover are there for additional shares, ADDITIONAL revenue streams, but In the mean time Pay the Shareholders what was collected on account gaining, accruing interest$$$. More smoke, mirrors, and bs.
EOM
AIMVHO
Oil
By: l_broke_o 15 Jun 2009, 02:09 AM EDT Rating: Msg. 841895 of 841906 (Reply to 841779 by oil.ipo)
Jump to msg. # Oil.ipo, I agree 100% with you. PAY THE FRIGGIN SHAREHOLDERS!!!!!!!!!!!
-BROKIE
|
|