Deep Capture Forums

DHS Holding Co. (DHSM)

Moderators:Admiral Lagrange, SevenTenEleven, goodolboy, rekcusdoo

http://investorshub.advfn.com/DHS-Holding-Co-DHSM-7860/



SevenTenEleven 

Monday, June 11, 2012 9:49:50 AM

Re: neophyte184 post# 26492

Post # of 26531

DHSM - Bidding for shares but it appears that short sellers and longs getting impatient have just about dried up. Looking forward to investor updates and confirmation of a number of material events discussed in PR's.

From below $0.20, this is an easy 5 to 10 bagger. Could run as high as $6, IMO with the right catalyst.

Hope to get filled today!




neophyte184 

Monday, June 11, 2012 9:51:27 AM

Re: SevenTenEleven post# 26493

Post # of 26531

Once selling is done, we should be in a fantastic position here. Awaiting the news machine to get this sucker rockin!

GL today grabbing the cheapies...




SevenTenEleven 

Monday, June 11, 2012 10:12:05 AM

Re: neophyte184 post# 26494

Post # of 26531

DHSM - Buying opportunity this morning.

Looking forward to investor updates!



neophyte184 

Monday, June 11, 2012 10:13:14 AM

Re: SevenTenEleven post# 26495

Post # of 26531

That is one interesting view on L2! LOL




SevenTenEleven 

Monday, June 11, 2012 10:14:21 AM

Re: neophyte184 post# 26496

Post # of 26531

DHSM - Yep! From $0.20 it gaps to $0.53 then well one a buck!



SevenTenEleven 

Monday, June 11, 2012 10:52:39 AM

Re: neophyte184 post# 26496

Post # of 26531

DHSM - Those little taps on the $0.20's trigger the shorts to sell more. They have to protect their capital requirements. Can't let the "books" look red for the day, now can they? LOL!

$0.10 to $0.20 will be at least a 10 bagger for those getting in at these levels, IMO!




neophyte184 

Monday, June 11, 2012 10:57:53 AM

Re: SevenTenEleven post# 26497

Post # of 26531

Anything can and usually does happen in this stock! LOL



neophyte184 

Monday, June 11, 2012 11:00:03 AM

Re: SevenTenEleven post# 26498

Post # of 26531

Love the sound of that. Patience and steady accumulation at current levels is a recipe for major profits down the road.



SevenTenEleven 

Monday, June 11, 2012 11:03:00 AM

Re: neophyte184 post# 26500

Post # of 26531

DHSM - I am nibbling as funds become available and as we wait for bigger and better movements on volume.

I have my predictions of $2 to $6 per share.

Looking forward to updates to support those levels.

Some have calculated much higher. But I would need to see much stronger news to justify levels above $6 at this point.

Like you said, anything can happen with this stock.



neophyte184 

Monday, June 11, 2012 11:13:15 AM

Re: SevenTenEleven post# 26501

Post # of 26531

Agreed about the necessary news to trigger bigger runs. Hopefully they give us such news. I have a funny feeling they will.



SevenTenEleven 

Monday, June 11, 2012 11:14:07 AM

Re: neophyte184 post# 26502

Post # of 26531

They are being very quiet after a nice period of updates. Have a feeling bigger and better things are coming shareholders' way!

Will continue to bid for more!



AlanC

Monday, June 11, 2012 11:33:30 AM

Re: SevenTenEleven post# 26503

Post # of 26531

Perhaps they are waiting for regulators to come down with a hammer on those attacking small companies by selling non existant shares? Go DHSM!!!




SevenTenEleven 

Monday, June 11, 2012 11:41:00 AM

Re: AlanC post# 26505

Post # of 26531

DHSM - News around corner, IMO. Company is not going to fluff things up until they have material information to share with investors.

I would LOVE to see another 25MM shares retired!

OUCH!



SevenTenEleven 

Monday, June 11, 2012 12:25:40 PM

Re: neophyte184 post# 26504

Post # of 26531

Someone shaking the tree hard today! News must be close!




SevenTenEleven 

Monday, June 11, 2012 12:32:07 PM

Re: AlanC post# 26505

Post # of 26531

DHSM - Heavy accumulation today.

Anticipating a strong move on news.



SevenTenEleven 

Monday, June 11, 2012 3:10:13 PM

Re: neophyte184 post# 26508

Post # of 26531

DHSM - Heavy volume today. Someone is loading up. Someone else is being shaken down and out.

News likely in the near future.




neophyte184 

Monday, June 11, 2012 3:25:06 PM

Re: SevenTenEleven post# 26510

Post # of 26531

Couple of big buys in the 10-11 cent range. Someone knows something with those size buys!



SevenTenEleven 

Monday, June 11, 2012 3:27:09 PM

Re: neophyte184 post# 26511

Post # of 26531

DHSM - I agree! Someone is very bullish with those huge buys! They are getting very lucky to load at these levels!



neophyte184 

Monday, June 11, 2012 3:29:22 PM

Re: SevenTenEleven post# 26512

Post # of 26531

It would appear so! Hopefully volume continues here...




SevenTenEleven 

Monday, June 11, 2012 3:35:57 PM

Re: fourinarow post# 23421

Post # of 26531

DHSM - Heavy volume today. A very motivated buyer grabbing shares on a major shakedown.

Hope you are watching closely. Looks like something could be around the corner.



janice shell 

Monday, June 11, 2012 4:36:36 PM

Re: neophyte184 post# 26511

Post # of 26531

According to the tape, every single trade was a sell.

http://ih.advfn.com/p.php?pid=trades&symbol=DHSM



SevenTenEleven 

Monday, June 11, 2012 4:51:41 PM

Re: janice shell post# 26515

Post # of 26531

ALMOST is the key word. ALMOST every single trade, with the exception of 3 trades.


Quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
According to the tape, every single trade was a sell.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



http://ih.advfn.com/p.php?pid=trades&symbol=DHSM

Good Luck!




SevenTenEleven 

Monday, June 11, 2012 5:06:08 PM

Re: BigBake1 post# 26518

Post # of 26531

DHSM - Manipulated it down today on 3 large trades (106,645, 134,895, and 30,290). All were odd sized trades. The support for those trades were not showing on L2's. Which means they were likely wash trades done by all-or-none orders from one hand to the other.

There were a number of other odd sized trades today. None of those trades hit bid support that was showing on level 2's. In fact, there was only about 30K in support from $0.10 to $0.11 while 355K in selling hit the bid.

Have to love the shorts playing their games!

Tic Toc



SevenTenEleven 

Monday, June 11, 2012 5:18:04 PM

Re: None

Post # of 26531

DHSM - Short Volume for June 11th - 2%

20120611|DHSM|7343|0|355349|O




SevenTenEleven 

Monday, June 11, 2012 5:20:19 PM

Re: AlanC post# 26505

Post # of 26531

DHSM - All buys traded today were shorted. The rest of the volume is questionable. There was no bid support showing for much of what traded at the bid. It is likely there were all-or-none trades that were washed to create the appearance of selling.

Have to love the short selling manipulators.

Tic Toc



janice shell 

Monday, June 11, 2012 5:22:38 PM

Re: SevenTenEleven post# 26521

Post # of 26531

Oh NOOOOOOOO!! That must have been a terrible disappointment!




SevenTenEleven 

Monday, June 11, 2012 5:22:55 PM

Re: BigBake1 post# 26523

Post # of 26531

Not even short volume involved in this to point to as almost all trades were in fact trade for trade...... lol... - BigBake1

Strange that there wasn't bid support showing on level 2's for a majority of the "selling" volume.

Appears to be wash trading to create illusion of selling or dilution.

Good Luck!



janice shell 

Monday, June 11, 2012 5:25:37 PM

Re: BigBake1 post# 26526

Post # of 26531

FTDs? I don't think we talk about FTDs here...



SevenTenEleven 

Monday, June 11, 2012 5:43:36 PM

Re: BigBake1 post# 26529

Post # of 26531

Thanks for confirming that market makers do not show all of their offers to the public.

Many of those hidden offers apparently existed today of DHSM! Wonder why the bid support that was responsible for a majority of today's volume was being hidden from retail traders?

Been watching DHSM's Level 2's closely for months, and have never seen such behavior before.


Quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Why would their be Bid support for all the sells? Not all liquidity is publicly displayed, there are 4 sources of liquidty in this marketplace, only two of them are publicly displayed, you see only half the picture and why one must not depend on L2 to tell the story. L2 is a trading tool and nothing more it does not tell you everything like many believe it does.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



Good luck!




BMFL<OD

next week(s) is here

Who's Next!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BfuWXRZe9yA

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pQBLi5mukmI


Shortmans Anthem!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fRge7lXu56E


Stay one step ahead of the Hyenas!

Cotton & Western Mining (CWRN)

Moderators:lucky,mydog, Rocket Man, microcaps1, tlc2, Chase Ferguson, 2H2O


MaxShockeR      
       
Monday, June 11, 2012 9:42:58 PM
Re: None            
Post # 74080

Agree at    Quote:They conducted a sting operation, and now they've brought charges.

Also they could be conducting another sting operation within this case, and now they are investigating the ongoiing DISTORTS .. IMHO of course wink

Gotta love the recent INTEREST in CWRN .. hmmmm

GLTA

$CWRN

EDIT: since SEC - FINRA - FBI etc.. are squeezing & more active towards scams, i would'nt be surprised to see an operation within another, but like i said it's just my opinion..maybe it will be a VIPER Operation instead of a simple STING...lol

----------------------------------------------

janice shell

Monday, June 11, 2012 9:49:01 PM
Re: MaxShockeR post# 74080
Post # of 74082

As if.

----------------------------------------------

Rocket Man

Monday, June 11, 2012 9:51:55 PM
Re: MaxShockeR post# 74080        
Post # 74084

I have the data that goes back well before the Sting in CWRN.. The data is very compelling and everyone should be happy to take a few minutes and go do your own investigation to the history. I hub provides some very good tools to look back and see what went down back then and after.. I hub has the tools to Paint a very good picture, you be the judge about CWRN check it out.. smile I wonder if something comes back to sting or even bite like a viper.. GLTUB

---------------------------------------------

SevenTenEleven

Monday, June 11, 2012 10:02:11 PM
Re: janice shell post# 74082
Post # of 74086

Anything is possible. I wouldn't rule it out.

---------------------------------------------

janice shell

Monday, June 11, 2012 10:29:15 PM
Re: SevenTenEleven post# 74086        
Post # of 74100

Generally speaking, "anything" is not possible in any circumstances.

---------------------------------------------

Rocket Man

Monday, June 11, 2012 10:12:38 PM
Re: SevenTenEleven post# 74086        
Post # of 74089

The so called calls of protection that Suggest Saving Share Holders in CWRN from FRAUD, are ultimately a sham! The data clearly shows the piling on after the news hit to drive CWRN into the abyss. The timing is perfect. The amount, the content, the aggressiveness compared to the charts, is so apparent that it takes one back, me for one! Put a non biased brain to the data from the DOJ.. I'll say A) they are crooked or your right, something is up and the smart one is all over it.. If not any one owning shares in the pinks to date is dead meat.

-------------------------------------------

JohnCM           

Monday, June 11, 2012 10:15:09 PM
Re: janice shell post# 74060    
Post # of 74090

Alright, I'll bite. Are we talking about photographs here? Or something more ...

Regulation Fair Disclosure - Reg FD

A rule passed by the Securities and Exchange Commission in an effort to prevent selective disclosure by public companies to market professionals and certain shareholders.

The Reg FD rule reads as follows: "Whenever an issuer, or any person acting on its behalf, discloses any material nonpublic information regarding that issuer or its securities to [certain enumerated persons], the issuer shall make public disclosure of that information... simultaneously, in the case of an intentional disclosure; and... promptly, in the case of a non-intentional disclosure."

Investopedia explains 'Regulation Fair Disclosure - Reg FD'
In the past, many companies released important information in meetings and conference calls where shareholders and the general public were excluded. The goal of this rule is to even the playing field between individual investors and institutional investors.

Read more:

-------------------------------------------

lucky,mydog

Monday, June 11, 2012 10:16:54 PM
Re: JohnCM post# 74090            
Post # 74092

Are we talking about photographs here?


if those photos were sent by bribery bob to select shareholders, then yes.

------------------------------------------

Rocket Man

Monday, June 11, 2012 10:18:52 PM
Re: JohnCM post# 74090        
Post # of 74094

I thought institutional investors don't trade sub pennies? My GOD they don't frkn short them in the USA, either way to expensive (Off shore we don't comment on.) for Peter sake.. lol

    Quote:Investopedia explains 'Regulation Fair Disclosure - Reg FD'
    In the past, many companies released important information in meetings and conference calls where shareholders and the general public were  excluded. The goal of this rule is to even the playing field between individual investors and institutional investors.

------------------------------------------

JohnCM

Monday, June 11, 2012 10:22:26 PM
Re: lucky,mydog post# 74092        
    Post # of 74095

Re: Reg FD

"Are we talking about photographs here?"

" ...if those photos were sent by bribery bob to select shareholders, then yes."

Well, this cannot be too difficult to come up with a simple ..
this is OK or it is not OK. Pretty cut and dry question. Once you have produced solid findings, please share.

I think, so far, we are at the guesswork phase .

------------------------------------------

Kubisiak5

Monday, June 11, 2012 10:23:35 PM
Re: lucky,mydog post# 74092    
Post # of 74096

Lol. So he has to obtain the emails of everyone to send them all pictures that supposedly dont mean anything? Instead of finding a couple people to post them to the world in a timely fashion. wOW thats rich.

------------------------------------------

Rocket Man

Monday, June 11, 2012 10:26:55 PM
Re: Kubisiak5 post# 74096        
Post # of 74099

No kidding go back 2 years and the price of the stock has tanked, remember.. lol Shall we go get that data today that shows that as well? lol

Cotton & Western Mining (CWRN)

Moderators:lucky,mydog, SevenTenEleven, Rocket Man, microcaps1, tlc2, 2H2O

http://investorshub.advfn.com/Cotton-&-Western-Mining-CWRN-5865/



Rocket Man

Monday, June 11, 2012 8:44:32 PM

Go back and look at the data the scheme got the stock price from whopping $.0024 as a low and $.0039 as a high and a close of $.0027 with relatively low volume as pinks go. We see similar movement in pricing for pinks on a regular basis. Follow the threads and see what one finds.. Notice that there was expectations of a PR, then there was talk of leaks of a PR and two days prior to the PR the stock was moving up. (Note: A disappearance of a key player 30 days prior to the PR, then a reemergence a week after.) There is no way in hell $1,472 worth of stock moved the CWRN price up and the PR was a dud to boot. Look from November to March and notice the tone and sentiment and then lack thereof, as 10 days were black out, as well and then look forward a week or two after the PR and who shows up and what happens there after. The stock tanks.. The lack thereof part is very interesting.. The quite time for 10 solid days is not to be forgotten. If the DOJ is doing an investigation and if they are as good as some/they say they are then they see what I see.. There was clearly a problem and it smells real fishy to me..



MaxShockeR

Monday, June 11, 2012 9:42:58 PM

Re: None

Post # of 74080
Agree @

Quote:

They conducted a sting operation, and now they've brought charges.


Also they could be conducting another sting operation within this case, and now they are investigating the ongoiing DISTORTS .. IMHO of course

GLTA

$CWRN

Rocket Man

Monday, June 11, 2012 10:12:38 PM

Re: SevenTenEleven post# 74086

Post # of 74092

The so called calls of protection that Suggest Saving Share Holders in CWRN from FRAUD, are ultimately a sham! The data clearly shows the piling on after the news hit to drive CWRN into the abyss. The timing is perfect. The amount, the content, the aggressiveness compared to the charts, is so apparent that it takes one back, me for one! Put a non biased brain to the data from the DOJ.. I'll say A) they are crooked or your right, something is up and the smart one is all over it.. If not any one owning shares in the pinks to date is dead meat.




Rocket Man 

Monday, June 11, 2012 11:11:22 PM

Re: lucky,mydog post# 74115

Post # of 74133

No, maybe the DOJ will open there eyes and investigate instead of having some punk snitch from Manzinillo set up a sting.. Might get a better use out of the money they pinch.. The take down when the news was sent out was far more profitable last week than in 2010 on the long side for sure!! Look at the data.. I was here to watch among many many others..



janice shell 

Monday, June 11, 2012 11:12:30 PM

Re: SevenTenEleven post# 74118

Post # of 74133

One would have to be able to prove that there was intent to withhold information from shareholders.

Why? I don't see "intent" as a provision of Reg FD. Any more than the SEC has to prove "intent" to default on required filings in order to revoke revocation.



janice shell 

Monday, June 11, 2012 11:14:41 PM

Re: SevenTenEleven post# 74121

Post # of 74134

We are talking about a content provider withholding a PR from being posted and alerted to subscribers.

No we aren't. If there's a PR, it'll be caught by many people. Even (gasp!) if IHub doesn't pick up on it. As, I believe, has happened a single time, more than a year ago.


SevenTenEleven 

Monday, June 11, 2012 11:15:53 PM

Re: Rocket Man post# 74122

Post # of 74134

The take down when the news was sent out was far more profitable last week than in 2010 on the long side for sure!! Look at the data.. I was here to watch among many many others.. - Rocket Man

I agree. If the CEO did pay the bribe he did, he got little to no return for the money. It appears to me that there may be a false claim against him. The timing isn't right. If there was a bribe to "help" run the stock, it surely didn't happen in 2010. It would have likely happened in 2011. Look at the charts!

Have a feeling the person making the claim, is connected to a short selling ring.

Just a thought for the DOJ to consider.



lucky,mydog 

Monday, June 11, 2012 11:18:01 PM

Re: SevenTenEleven post# 74127

Post # of 74134

Have a feeling the person making the claim, is connected to a short selling ring.

the undercover fbi agent? short selling? this is beyond bizarre.



janice shell 

Monday, June 11, 2012 11:18:06 PM

Re: SevenTenEleven post# 74127

Post # of 74136

If the CEO did pay the bribe he did, he got little to no return for the money.

Of course. What was important for the FBI was that he willingly signed on. They weren't about to help him make money.

Have a feeling the person making the claim, is connected to a short selling ring.

No "person" made any claim. The FBI did, and it appears to be fully documented, as these things tend to be. You think those phone calls weren't taped?




Rocket Man 

Monday, June 11, 2012 11:21:54 PM

Re: janice shell post# 74125

Post # of 74136

What one single time are we talking about a year ago? Are we talking CWRN?


Quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
No we aren't. If there's a PR, it'll be caught by many people. Even (gasp!) if IHub doesn't pick up on it. As, I believe, has happened a single time, more than a year ago. Janice Shell
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Just a little short? I wouldn't want to be, at all~ 




janice shell 

Monday, June 11, 2012 11:24:22 PM

Re: Rocket Man post# 74130

Post # of 74137

Last year. I think 13 May 2011. Too lazy to look it up. Happens sometimes, but I'm sure it was just another Evil Plot.



SevenTenEleven 

Monday, June 11, 2012 11:24:23 PM

Re: janice shell post# 74125

Post # of 74137

No we aren't. If there's a PR, it'll be caught by many people. Even (gasp!) if IHub doesn't pick up on it. As, I believe, has happened a single time, more than a year ago. - janice shell

Yes we are. We are discussing a content provider getting a bad feed or intentionally not flagging news.

I have only witnessed it once with iHub's feed. It was on another stock. Wasn't big news, so it had no material impact, IMO. I am sure it happens. Whether it happens intentionally, that is a completely different conversation. I know there is a few minute delay from when iHub posts news to when the "flag" appears next to the trading symbol on "favorites".

Stocks I am watching, I have level 2's running for them. Announcements for news or filings show up immediately. I am able to react to the market much quicker than waiting for the "flag" to appear. One reason I prefer to use iHub's Level 2's.

If CWRN had a ongoing problem with news being flagged, then I would say there was a problem. I would bring it to admin's attention to make sure there isn't a problem with their feed.



janice shell 

Monday, June 11, 2012 11:27:59 PM

Re: SevenTenEleven post# 74133

Post # of 74138

I have only witnessed it once with iHub's feed.

Stuff happens. And I've seen it on other sites. Like Yahoo. CWRN has no "ongoing problem" with its feed to IHub.



Kubisiak5 

Monday, June 11, 2012 11:30:20 PM

Re: None

Post # of 74138

Amazing all of the people with no vested interest in this stock paying us visits here. Looking forward to when they head back to where they came from, so we can get back to talking about OUR company in a pleasant atmosphere again.




lucky,mydog 

Monday, June 11, 2012 11:34:07 PM

Re: Kubisiak5 post# 74137

Post # of 74138

so what? what is the point? that ihub or it's content provider is somehow involved in a conspiricy against cwrn?


BMFL<OD

next week(s) is here

Who's Next!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BfuWXRZe9yA

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pQBLi5mukmI


Shortmans Anthem!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fRge7lXu56E


Stay one step ahead of the Hyenas!

Cotton & Western Mining (CWRN)

Moderators:lucky,mydog, SevenTenEleven, Rocket Man, microcaps1, tlc2, 2H2O

investorshub.advfn.com/Cotton-&-Western-Mining-CWRN-5865/

---------------------------------


microcaps1

Tuesday, June 12, 2012 6:43:23 AM
Re: balihi post# 74151        
Post # 74168

FD disclosures-Its obvious that not every disclosure is material for Walker says co' s have to make difficult decisions re what is material everyday.
Ship coming to pick up the ore at dock was PR'd Nov 17 and possibly Apr 13-so how are pics of ship picking up such ore material? Its analogous to a "human interest" story -doesnt change known facts-just shows the procedure involved

Walker says:
"Regulation FD was not designed as a trap for the unwary, as many law firms are counseling. In fact, the Commission took a number of steps in revising he final rule for the specific purpose of disarming many potential traps.

For example, under the express language of Regulation FD there is no liability under Rule 10b-5 for failure to make a public disclosure required by FD. This means that FD is not a fraud rule, and perhaps of greater importance, there is no exposure to private liability, which should go a long way in reducing anxiety levels.

In addition, the express language of the rule says that in order to violate Regulation FD, an issuer must have acted recklessly or intentionally in making a selective disclosure. What this means is that we're not going to second-guess close calls regarding the materiality of a potential disclosure. An issuer's incorrect determination that information is not material must represent an "extreme departure" from standards of reasonable care in order for us to allege a violation of FD. "

---------------------------------

SevenTenEleven

Tuesday, June 12, 2012 8:49:18 AM
Re: Kubisiak5 post# 74137            
Post # 74177

OK, so we know it happens. If there has been a glitch in the past, admins have been quick to fix it. I would advise to scan other news sources until one is comfortable with the rate at which news is alerted.

Mods, including myself, often will post news before it is flagged. Like I said, I use iHub's Level 2's, which I love, to alert me of the news immediately.

Remember, there is a few minute delay in ALL news being flagged.

I will be scanning for news for CWRN in the coming days/weeks

---------------------------------

SevenTenEleven       

Tuesday, June 12, 2012 9:06:20 AM
Re: None            
Post # 74181

CWRN - Short Volume for June 11th - 32%

20120611|CWRN|3044999|0|9521793|O

---------------------------------

2H2O

Tuesday, June 12, 2012 9:12:20 AM
Re: SevenTenEleven post# 74181        
Post # 74193

Those pesky shorts again, they seem to have infiltrated the SEC and DOJ specifically to bring down the sp of a pink, non-reporting, CE tagged CWRN! LOL

---------------------------------

SevenTenEleven

Tuesday, June 12, 2012 9:13:46 AM
Re: 2H2O post# 74183        
Post # 74184

All shareholders should be concerned when that daily number is significantly higher than 50%, day in and day out.

    Quote:Those pesky shorts again, they seem to have infiltrated the SEC and DOJ specifically to bring down the sp of a pink, non-reporting, CE tagged CWRN! LOL


Good Luck!

---------------------------------

joev2

Tuesday, June 12, 2012 9:20:43 AM
Re: SevenTenEleven post# 74184
Post # 74186

Yes, they should be. They should be concerned that the shorts see something they expect to collapse. It's very rare shorts pile onto a decent company with a strong future. Otoh, when you have a company that's been around as long as this one has; has had a history of reverse splits and exaggerated press releases; now is totally silent with a CE rating and a ceo who's been charged with fraud.....well....for some, that's just too much of a temptation to resist.

---------------------------------

2H2O

Tuesday, June 12, 2012 9:34:36 AM
Re: bill56 post# 74188        
Post # 74190

No port updates... remember, we have pictures from the 1st and 2nd shipments that were PR'ed, but somehow, all these other shipments that weren't PR'ed didn't have pictures. Yes yes, it's not 'allowed' at the port, but people pulled it off the 1st and 2nd time without a hitch- Bob and Sharon even posing on the ship - (doesn't look like they were in a hurry to have the pic snapped before they violated the picture rules either) but hey.

So no - nothing new at the port - especially the all important pictures that are so reliable to everyone. I guess absence makes the heart grow stronger on that one?

---------------------------------

Rocket Man

Tuesday, June 12, 2012 12:42:53 PM
Re: Barami post# 74197            
Post # 74199

Not so sure about the pump, but the dump was real.. So is the stock! It is real that the dump trucks are finishing up filling the ship.. Notice how low the ship is in the water compared to the container ship.. Lets hope they didn't over fill this one.. Wait it wouldn't matter because they dredged the port for CWRN.. smile Ask yous self why would Mexico dredge a port for a stinky pinky.. lol Get my point? They wouldn't! Now lets see an update from the company and see where we are going!

---------------------------------

Rocket Man

Tuesday, June 12, 2012 12:50:30 PM
Re: 2H2O post# 74201            
Post # 74203

CWRN~ Comparison~

I hear money coming into my pocket when the marekt realizes what CWRN is doing. FOOOOGGGG HOOOORRNNNN sized pay days! LOUD and CLEAR!! lol

---------------------------------

2H2O

Tuesday, June 12, 2012 1:06:50 PM
Re: Rocket Man post# 74203        
Post # 74205

I heard silence (and still do) since June 4th when our CEO was indicted on charges of bribery.

--------------------------------

Think or Swim

Tuesday, June 12, 2012 1:09:20 PM
Re: Rocket Man post# 74203        
Post # 74206

Tsk, tsk, tsk...first you gotta get it back from shorty...lmao

--------------------------------

Rocket Man

Tuesday, June 12, 2012 1:19:19 PM
Re: Think or Swim post# 74206        
Post # 74212

Good point! lol Very good point.

---------------------------------

janice shell

Tuesday, June 12, 2012 1:35:27 PM
Re: future1 post# 74164        
Post # 74218

How can ANY information be considered material if such seasoned traders don't believe any of it?

I wasn't talking about whether I believe, or would believe, information PR'd by the company. I was talking about disclosure made in compliance with Reg FD.

--------------------------------

JohnCM Member Level             
Tuesday, June 12, 2012 1:35:47 PM
Re: dhjr123 post# 74215            
Post # 74219

.........QUOTE:"Did the SEC find out what island Bob is on, They could not find him in Mexico."


The photos! The photos!

--------------------------------

JohnCM
             
Tuesday, June 12, 2012 1:38:31 PM
Re: 2H2O post# 74217            
Post # 74220

"If you mean me, no, I don't want to see that. I do want to see Bob held accountable to his shareholders and/or the SEC & DOJ. Enough is enough with this guy already. I'm a long but I see no future with this guy."

After ship number 3 and number 4, Bob will have sooo much revenue he will have to spend some on accountants, lawyers, filings and financials.

If Bob started today, how long would it take to be current from late 2009?

--------------------------------

2H2O

Tuesday, June 12, 2012 1:40:58 PM
Re: JohnCM post# 74220        
Post # 74221

I don't think it was every in the cards to be current. Bob's plan was to go public, raise $$, prove that there is some ore at the mine and that it can be shipped, then sell the company before he has to do any real work towards transparency. Looks like this new trip up, just like when he got hit with the CE, is foiling the plan.

--------------------------------

JohnCM

Tuesday, June 12, 2012 1:54:09 PM
Re: 2H2O post# 74221        
Post # 74222

Bob said he does not want to sell the mine, "it is too good".

Of course he may be playing hard to get.

This might be a perfect time to sell the company. But I don't think Bob wants to let it go ...

If you had a successful mine and your net worth is sufficient, what is the motivation for Bob to bring the financials current? Would he need to do this if the company were for sale? Doubt it ... right? You can sell a company "as is"?

This is a silly question. There must be a minimum amount of information provided. Ownership, lease, rental or royalty information in regards to land, equipment, agreements, contracts, etc.

CWRN

--------------------------------

Barami 

Tuesday, June 12, 2012 2:04:08 PM
Re: None
Post # 74225

With all do respect rocket man you seem to know what you are talking about and seem to have a inside scoop into cwrn. However I been seeing your pic and listing to you for the past year or so when the stock price was at .02. With all the pics and all the grand things that cwrn is going to do why sir has the price gone down and nothing but bade news is comming out. Seems to me that your creditably is fading.

-------------------------------

Rocket Man
           
Tuesday, June 12, 2012 2:16:42 PM
Re: JohnCM post# 74224            
Post # 74227

Odd that with Bob in trouble we still see upward movement.. Must be the reality setting in that CWRN is a producer and at sub pennies. I'f financials were to be put out.?. Hold on to your hat!! lol

---------------------------------

Barami
Tuesday, June 12, 2012 2:26:53 PM
Re: None            
Post # 74230

No not at all, I am saying that every thing rocket man is saying and what the company is doing is completely different. According to rocket man this should be a dollar stock but why has nothing but bade news from sec and no PR no fin ce ect. Ect.. rocket man just pumps why didn't he tell us all the bade new before it came out he seem to know all the other news. I feel like a sucker listening to him and all the pics.

--------------------------------

Rocket Man
Tuesday, June 12, 2012 2:28:59 PM
Re: Barami post# 74225            
Post # 74231

If you have been reading and watching there has been no support from the company to give the stock price support. No financials, only a few PRs and photos for progress of sorts on what the mine is doing. That has had a waning effect on the price and then the bad news hit and it kicked the price in the teeth and the bee's swarmed and took her down 666%.. The shipping of ORE should get this thing moving.. We see that the new trommel can produce 10k mt a day and it as been on site since around 05/19/2012. OMRI sells for $350 - $500 mt.. The math works in our favor.. We just need to get direction from the company.. The sooner the better imo.. GLTU

-------------------------------

Barami   
           
Tuesday, June 12, 2012 2:37:03 PM
Re: Rocket Man post# 74231            
Post # 74233

Yes I agree with you but the key thing is direction from the company it sounds like to me Bob is way over is head and should let professional run this company. Because if what you say is true there should not be half this crap going on.

-------------------------------

Rocket Man

Tuesday, June 12, 2012 3:02:20 PM
Re: Barami post# 74233            
Post # 74235

He has a problem we all know that however, it is not mining or shipping ore to China now is it? lol

-------------------------------

Barami      
   
Tuesday, June 12, 2012 3:09:17 PM
Re: Rocket Man post# 74235        
Post # 74236

It does not matter how much they ship or make if the company is run into the ground and keep letting this crap go on we the share holder are losser.

-------------------------------

Rocket Man
Tuesday, June 12, 2012 3:14:38 PM
Re: Barami post# 74236        
Post # 74237

How is the company being run into the ground. It looks to me like they are digging the ground and the company after digging the ground, grinds the ore up and ships it from Mexico's ground to finally rest on China's ground.. That is some serious running the business of out of the ground alright.

Last edited by MaxShockeR (2012-06-12 14:28:59)

Fortress Financial Group (fka FFGO)

Moderators:underdog150, SevenTenEleven, Rocket Man, Vianna, TomSawyer, Mike2211

http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/board.aspx?board_id=3111



SevenTenEleven 

Tuesday, June 12, 2012 7:46:21 PM

Re: Rocket Man post# 201895

Post # of 201915

$0.1067 per common share of FFGO is the fair market value for the mines/claims!

Add on another $1 to $4 per share to prevent criminal prosecution of the bankers, brokers, and market makers who all conspired to commit fraud by naked short selling FFGO from $4 per share to no bid!

Tic Toc



SevenTenEleven 

Tuesday, June 12, 2012 7:55:15 PM

Re: wrenchman post# 201898

Post # of 201915

Wouldn't take much to trigger the dividend distribution process.

Looking forward to the company wrapping everything up soon!

Tic Toc



SevenTenEleven 

Tuesday, June 12, 2012 8:00:14 PM

Re: varmit post# 201781

Post # of 201915

It appears that the dividend process may be coming to a close.

Brokers are getting very aggressive in their requests and they are insisting that shareholders take 100% losses ahead of 3449% to 4600000% gains.

Tic Toc



tatoo1 

Tuesday, June 12, 2012 8:29:10 PM

Re: alien42 post# 201883

Post # of 201916

Writing them off or selling. Bottom line is they are no longer in your account.



Rocket Man 

Tuesday, June 12, 2012 8:33:25 PM

Re: SevenTenEleven post# 201900

Post # of 201916

There is GOLD, the neighbor is producing GOLD adjacent to the Copperstone.. Sounds good to me..

Just a little short? I wouldn't want to be, at all~



Rocket Man 

Tuesday, June 12, 2012 8:35:01 PM

Re: wrenchman post# 201898

Post # of 201916

FFGO~ re activated.. Nice.. That will be a hoot..



Rocket Man 

Tuesday, June 12, 2012 8:37:53 PM

Re: None

Post # of 201916

NMGL+WD/FFGO = $.003449. Nice!


tatoo1   

Tuesday, June 12, 2012 8:40:31 PM

Re: SevenTenEleven post# 201887

Post # of 201916

Thanks Seven. In fact I presented pretty much your position. He kept telling me there would not be a dividend because the stock no longer exists. I continued to tell him the dividend was arranged previously. etc. But he was intent on saying the stock no longer trades.




SevenTenEleven 

Tuesday, June 12, 2012 8:42:07 PM

Re: tatoo1 post# 201910

Post # of 201916

The brokers are incentivized when TDA gets to keep the spoils!

FFGO will pay out the dividend. I am guessing it will be cash as discussed in the FAQ's!

Tic Toc



Rocket Man 

Tuesday, June 12, 2012 8:43:34 PM

Re: SevenTenEleven post# 201902

Post # of 201916

Volume increased on one of the sisters today.. Wonder if NITE was needing to move shares. The trade of 144700, it was not the first time I witnessed that amount, screen shot.. FFGO is tied to NMGL and the folks at GNCP keep in mind.. Form 15 any one? lol


Just a little short? I wouldn't want to be, at all~



Rocket Man 

Tuesday, June 12, 2012 8:53:25 PM

Re: tatoo1 post# 201910

Post # of 201917

Lol, Because of NMGL+WD/FFGO = $.00349.. A flunky on the phone doing an effective criminal enterprises bidding for a measly paycheck.. Go figure.. Wait til TDa gets their HGLC issue on their plate (related to FFGO. FACT!).. lol Some very compelling data to say the least.. Way to many people have the brokers by the ______lls.. It takes years for the PTB do get things done.. I can wait.. I see where chump change charges take 2 or more years to even get out in the open.. Only takes seconds for the sentiment to hammer stocks with a goal of going no bid.. Interesting how if one reads that traders show up with never having been involved with a company based on history yet, have a very profound knowledge about the Company.

Just a little short? I wouldn't want to be, at all~


SevenTenEleven 

Tuesday, June 12, 2012 8:55:49 PM

Re: Rocket Man post# 201912

Post # of 201917

I have noticed NITE does that a lot for OTC stocks that they have a potential FTD issue with.

FFGO will pay the dividend and those short will know they were short, when they are short paying their liability.

Tic Toc



Rocket Man 

Tuesday, June 12, 2012 9:01:14 PM

Re: SevenTenEleven post# 201914

Post # of 201917

Telling people to write down there shares in FFGO should be an eye opener..


Quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
On or after January 1, 2011, NMGL may at its sole and absolute discretion redeem all or part of either of the Preferred Series “A” shares or the Preferred Series “B” shares for cash. This is at the discretion of the NMGL Board of Directors and there is absolutely no possibility that NMGL has any intention whatsoever of considering any such actions at that time. NMGL, at this time, considers these transactions as a mere “warehousing” exercise, their intention is to obtain 100% ownership of both Bouse Gold, Inc. and South Copperstone, Inc. over a period of time, to then use their best efforts to dispose of both Bouse Gold, Inc. and South Copperstone, Inc. and if successful, NMGL would then redeem the Preferred Series “A” and the Preferred Series “B” shares for cash and at their face value.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------




Quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Quote:
Investor FAQ

(Updated 9/8/2010- 9:43 AM)

The various subjects covered in this section are in response to the most pertinent questions being asked by our stockholders. We are of the opinion that we have covered all of the various topics of interest and will add to this list as additional topics become relevant:

Additional Questions and Answers Concerning the Sale of the Company’s Gold Interests and the proposed payment of an Extraordinary Dividend

Fortress Financial Group, Inc. (“Fortress”) has now successfully concluded on September 8, 2010; the sale of the company’s gold interests to North American Gold & Minerals Fund (“NMGL”) for Preferred Series “A” and Preferred Series “B” shares of NMGL stock.

This update is intended to address many of the questions that our shareholders have asked concerning this transaction, the future dividend process and the eventuality of receiving cash in respect of this dividend.

It is an unfortunate consequence of this process that no matter how much information we communicate to the shareholders, there will inevitably be still more questions that come up. This update is conclusive in that the answers that we provide herein summarize the status of the sale process and the proposed dividends up to this point in time.

Since the company is ceasing to operate, there will be no further updates and the shareholders must rely solely on regulatory filings and company emails as they come forward in the course of events in order to receive any further insight into the dividend payout process. This will take some time, and we cannot at this time say how long it will take.

The company and its majority shareholders have taken the view that however long it takes to receive the NMGL Preferred Series “A” and Series “B” share dividends and for those dividends to be converted into a cash payout, it will have been well worth the wait when that time comes. This is the reason that Fortress has issued so much guidance as to the likely value of the cash payout in respect of the proposed extraordinary dividend.

Clearly any investor in this day and time would consider an investment yielding several multiples of the money invested would be an investment worth waiting for. This is the result that Fortress has labored to achieve for all of our shareholders, large and small. Our labors are now concluded and now we only await the dividend distribution and subsequent conversion of the assets by the purchaser, into cash.

Question: In layman’s terms how does this benefit us all?

There are several major benefits to shareholders that apply.

The structure of the final deal has taken care of many previously insurmountable hurdles concerning the eventual disposal of the assets. Quite simply, how do you dispose of something that you only own a portion of? The purchaser has taken that problem off the table as they will be purchasing the entirety of the assets so they can be readily disposed. In addition, the purchaser has sorted through many of the problematic contractual details that were absolutely vital in order to dispose of the assets.

The issuance of the NMGL Preferred Series “A” and “B” shares is an excellent vehicle for this purpose as it guarantees the holders of these Preferred shares that only they will benefit from the disposal of the assets. Preferred shares are commonly issued by major corporations for special classes of investment that are designed as maximum protected for the holders of those Preferred shares.

The purchaser is designed to become a highly qualified institutional quality organization. Though there is little information available in the public record at this time, this will become much clearer as time goes by.

The NMGL Preferred Series “A” and Series “B” Preferred shares will be tradable at such time as a Registration Statement is filed by NMGL with the SEC in respect of these instruments and such Registration Statement has become effective.

What about historic dividends versus the FFGO common stock dividends?

Some shareholders have received dividends from their stock holdings in 2005. Those shareholder accounts are kept in the company records and the DTC lists of the stock registers for the historic shareholders. Fortress filed a Form 8-K detailing the apportionment of shareholdings pertaining to historic shareholders versus current shareholder of Fortress shares of common stock. The details of that apportionment can be viewed on the company web site www.fortfinancegroup.com under ‘investors’ -> ‘dividends’ -> historic dividends.

All shareholders will become shareholders of NMGL Series “A” Preferred and NMGL Series “B” preferred shares if they are stockholders of Record when Fortress announces this Dividend. This is a necessary step in the process of cleanly apportioning a cash distribution should NMGL be successful in obtaining a cash buyer for these assets.

NMGL intends to purchase 100% ownership of Bouse Gold, Inc. and South Copperstone, Inc. This is imperative if they are to sell these Gold assets for cash going forward. NMGL has not however provided us with any timeframe as to when they intend to acquire the additional shares of Bouse Gold, Inc. and South Copperstone, Inc. and NMGL will clearly continue to follow their own business plan and will only complete all of these transactions as and when it fits into their own business plan. This NMGL policy very clearly extends as well to their purchasing shares from historic stockholders from 2005 who received shares of Bouse Gold, Inc. and of South Copperstone, Inc.

What about the share price guidance given by Fortress to Shareholders?

The share price guidance given by Fortress to shareholders is quite simply the most basic and rudimentary means to convey what the company believes is the value of the assets in terms of the value of the shares that each shareholder owns. This guidance is useful in that it guides not only what the shareholders might reasonably expect to receive in compensation for their patient investment, but also guides the company and the purchaser as to what value they should expect to receive for disposal of the assets.

Some shareholders have expressed disappointment that the extraordinary dividend was not at least a partial cash dividend. Hopefully from the foregoing commentary one can glean the enormous challenges in arriving at a final cash distribution for sale of the gold interests. Fortress has made enormous progress to bringing that reality about by all of the preparations for this forthcoming dividend.

Hopefully even those who see themselves as an “unsophisticated investor” who do not fully understand this transaction can now see that the way has been prepared to achieve the fruition of their investment. How could Fortress issue a cash dividend for an asset that it has not yet been disposed of? How could it dispose of an asset that it only partially owns? If even a partial cash dividend had been made that would have multiplied the complexity of making a final cash disbursement to shareholders and put the entire sale process at risk. NMGL effectively came in as a “White Knight” to rescue this deal. NMGL receives a mere 5% fee upon their concluding a cash sale of the assets coupled with any excess in the event of the assets being sold at an amount exceeding the face value of the NMGL Preferred Series “A” and Series “B” shares. Had NMGL not rescued Fortress, the Loan Note Holders would have bankrupted Fortress and Searchlight Exploration, LLC would have exercised its legal rights and seized the Company’s Gold interests without delay.

There have been several questions directed at nuances of the valuations for the preferred shares such as the 3% dividend, the possibility of more value than the estimated valuation given based on Gold prices, etc. and the payment of fees to North American Gold & Minerals Fund. Our response to all of these questions is basically the same one, there will be no further guidance given other than that which has already been specified by the regulatory filings and shareholder updates issued to date. These questions are nuanced details that are far and away overshadowed by the eventuality of the actual completion of the asset disposal and subsequent cash payments. We do not wish to trivialize these matters, but our company will not debate detailed logistical points about minor expenses in the costing of effecting this outcome and we certainly will not offer undue instruction as to the form and format of the entire process which has yet to be determined other than what has already been outlined and which will conclude through an agency outside of our direct control.

What assurance is there that in the event of the mines being sold, shareholders will not simply be given more shares?

Fortress has no ability to make any guarantees, because the purchaser (NMGL) of the gold interests takes the control of this issue out of the hands of Fortress. However, it must be said that the interests of all of the majority shareholders of FFGO and the interests of minority shareholder are perfectly and equally aligned. Why would the majority shareholders want to indefinitely receive distributions of illiquid shares that do not result in a positive return for our investments? All of the shareholders want to realize a significant return on their investment. That is why this transaction has taken place in the manner that it has and why we are now saying that the stage is set for the ultimate return to be realized in due course.

We believe that this transaction is the final step to the ultimate realization of a monetary return for your investment. It may take several months and even more than a year to realize that return in full. Whatever the case, the return will be well worth the wait if you are a believer in the price of Gold maintaining its price in excess of US$900/oz over that time period. The majority shareholders of Fortress are long term investors that have invested their money in the Company for the ultimate return to be realized from the eventual disposal of the gold interests. The idea that somehow the majority investors have benefited from the sales of Fortress shares of common stock at a huge discount to the anticipated value of this return is ludicrous and our shareholders should completely disregard any speculation that suggests otherwise.

Will North American Gold & Minerals Fund provide Investor Relations support and interact with the holders of its Preferred Series “A” and Preferred Series “B” Stock?

No, NMGL will not. It is NMGL policy not to comment whatsoever outside of its Regulatory Filings. NMGL is being created to be an “Institutionally Held” Mining Investment & Finance Fund and it will conduct its business in the normal course of events as do all other substantial quoted corporations.

Fortress was unique in its information flow to stockholders. Since NMGL does not have retail investors or small stockholders, it operates its business in a very different manner. NMGL has made it very clear that it will not respond to questions of whatsoever nature and that it will only provide information in its filings with the SEC.

Fortress stockholders are reminded that they are the recipients of NMGL Preferred Series “A” and Series “B” shares. These instruments are nonvoting and not convertible into shares of NMGL common stock under any circumstances. Only holders of NMGL shares of common stock would be in a position to (a) vote and (b) discuss matters with NMGL Management.
Will Fortress continue to provide Investor Relations support, issue Press Releases and continue day to day communication with its stockholders?

No, the Investor Relations support currently being provided will cease in and during September of 2010. This extends to incoming E Mail and telephonic messages. At such time as the Dividend dates are set, stockholders will be advised by E Mail and through a Form 8-K Filing by Fortress.

Fortress has no cash; its Lenders are ceasing financial support, as previously announced. This means that any such support simply cannot be provided to stockholders. Fortress will now become dormant and no deal is likely to emerge to change this status, primarily due to Fortress being a delinquent filer with the SEC and is therefore an extremely unattractive “Reverse Merger” Candidate. In any event, Fortress cannot and will not entertain any deals of any nature until the dividend process is completed at a future date. In short, Fortress has now become dormant.

There is absolutely no doubt that at some point, the SEC will move the listing of Fortress from that of the OTC Pink Markets, Inc. to that of the “Grey Market” as it is a delinquent filer and does not qualify to become a “Non Reporting” Company due to the size of its stockholder base.

Does Fortress hold any other assets of whatsoever nature?

No, it does not. Its sole assets were its shares of Bouse Gold, Inc. and South Copperstone, Inc. common stock; now disposed of to NMGL. These shares were held by Western Diversified Mining resources, Inc. (“Western”), a wholly owned subsidiary company of Fortress.

Western (and Fortress) now only hold the NMGL Preferred Series “A” and Series “B” shares. These will be distributed in full as a dividend to stockholders on the Record Date in due course. Certain of these NMGL Preferred Series “A” and Series “B” shares owned by Western/Fortress will be transferred at face value to Sloane Investments, Inc. to settle all debt owed by Fortress/Western to Sloane Investments, Inc.

The shares of Hunt Gold Corporation common stock owned by Fortress were written off as irrecoverable over a year ago as detailed in our Form 8-K Filings. There appear to be many of whom are of the opinion that these shares of Hunt Gold Corporation has some value. They are sadly mistaken and indeed delusional. Hunt Gold Corporation has no assets whatsoever, extensive liabilities and is not even worth placing into bankruptcy. It lost and forfeited each and every Mining asset that it ever had any claim to. It is quoted on the “Grey Market”, has no Management, is dormant and its shares of common stock are completely worthless.

Those who continue to assert that Fortress holds other assets despite numerous regulatory filings to the contrary are living in fantasy land and their comments stating that other assets exist should be ignored.

Are there any known substantial short positions in Fortress shares of common stock?

Not in our opinion as there is not a shred of evidence to substantiate these wild theories. Those who are true believers in supposed “forced covers” and “bear squeezes” are way off base in our opinion. This type of speculation should be treated as pure fantasy on their parts.

Are there any prospective buyers for either “Bouse” or “South Copperstone” at this time?

According to NMGL, there are no serious buyers with cash at this date. Offers that were made to date were not acceptable to NMGL as they involved stock in other quoted corporations.

How foreseeable or under what circumstances could there be or is there to be a partial liquidation of the NMGL Preferred Series “A” or Series “B” shares?

This not a likely event insofar as the current strategy of NMGL is to acquire a 100% interest in Bouse Gold, Inc. and South Copperstone, Inc. and to dispose of these two corporations and utilize the proceeds to redeem the NMGL Preferred Series “A” and the Series “B” shares. WE cannot comment on behalf of NMGL but we would caution stockholders not to rely upon partial any liquidation whatsoever of the NMGL Preferred Series “A” and Series “B”.

Would NMGL ever consider a conversion of the NMGL Preferred Series “A” and the “Series “B” shares into NMGL shares of Common Stock?

Absolutely not; and under no circumstances would this ever happen. The NMGL Preferred Series “A” and Series “B” shares are not convertible whatsoever and have no voting rights whatsoever.

What is the opinion of the Company in respect of the Internet Stock Chat Forums at this time?

Fortress’s Management, Advisors and Investor Relations have absolutely no interest in the various comments posted on these Internet Stock Chat Forums and do not even feel the need to view any of the same. Those who allow themselves to become agitated by postings on these Forums on a daily basis will no longer be in a position to seek constant reassurances from Fortress or its Investor Relations.

NMGL’s Management, Advisors, etc. have no interest in these Internet Stock Chat Forums and have advised ourselves in no uncertain terms that they are completely oblivious to these types of investor discussions as they are not interested in retail investors or their opinions at this time.

What assurances do holders of NMGL Preferred Series “A” and Series “B” shares have that if the mines are sold, that NMGL will not accept stock in another corporation?

There are no guarantees. That is an NMGL decision going forward. However NMGL has stated that if they were to accept stock it would only be in a large corporation with freely tradable liquid shares of common stock.

Does the price of Gold affect the holders of NMGL Preferred Series “A” and Series “B” shares?

In our opinion, it does not. However should the price of Gold decline dramatically prior to NMGL disposing of Bouse Gold, Inc. and South Copperstone, Inc. then the NMGL Preferred Series “A” and Series “B” shares would be worth less than their face value.

Are there any plans to develop either “Bouse” or “South Copperstone” if they are not sold soon?

No. NMGL has not expressed any interest in developing these Mines as they have stated that at this time, they are merely “warehousing” both “Bouse” and “South Copperstone” on behalf of the holders of the Preferred Series “A” and Series “B” shares. NMGL has their own business plans which are solely the business of the holders of NMGL shares of common stock and not the business of Fortress stockholders.

However it is possible that NMGL may change their strategy in respect of these Mines. They have not provided any guidance to ourselves whatsoever in this respect.

Upon the payment of the Dividend, will the NMGL Preferred Series “A” and Series “B” be delivered in Certificate Form?

No, they will not be delivered in certificate form if stockholders hold their Fortress shares of common stock in a brokerage account. Those whom are named on the Fortress stockholder register at the Record Date of the Dividend would receive their dividend in certificate form.

This Dividend will not be declared until NMGL has (a) acquired the balance of the Bouse Gold, Inc. shares of common stock giving them 100% ownership of Bouse Gold, Inc. through the issue of additional NMGL Preferred Series “A” shares (b) acquired the balance of the South Copperstone, Inc. shares of common stock giving them 100% ownership of South Copperstone, Inc. through the issue of additional NMGL Preferred Series “B” shares (c) audited both Bouse Gold, Inc. and South Copperstone, Inc. (d) NMGL will be required to file a “Super Form 8-K with SEC upon their obtaining control of both Bouse Gold, Inc. and South Copperstone, Inc. (e) filed a Registration Statement with the SEC in respect of the NMGL Preferred Series “A” and Series “B” shares (f) such Registration Statement has become effective (g) obtained a CUSIP Number and a Trading Symbol for both the NMGL Preferred Series “A” and the Series “B” shares and (h) admitted the NMGL Preferred Series “A” and Series “B” shares for trading on a recognized exchange.

NMGL has set these “ground rules” as stated above and they are not negotiable. NMGL refuses to enter into any discussions or debates of whatsoever nature in respect of these transactions, as is their right.

If the mines sell for more than the existing price, will the increase be given to the Preferred Shareholders?

No. The face value of the NMGL Preferred Series “A” is US$16.00 per share and the face value of the NMGL Preferred Series “B” is US$2.20 per share. Should there be any excess over the face value of these Preferred Series “A” and Series ”B”, it will be solely for benefit of NMGL and their holders of shares of common stock.

How can I calculate the value of my historical dividends?

Guidance has been given for the value of the historical dividends in the aforementioned website page titled ‘historical dividends’ under the ‘dividend’ section of the “Investor” page at the website: www.fortfinancegroup.com.

When NMGL elects to purchase the shares of Bouse Gold, Inc. common stock and South Copperstone, Inc. common stock from those stockholders who received these aforesaid shares of common stock through the 2005 Dividends, it will do so at the same pricing per share as announced and through the issue of additional NMGL Preferred Series “A” and Series “B” shares. NMGL has given no undertakings as to when it intends to purchase these aforesaid shares.

I have shares held in a brokerage account that either no longer exists or has been changed. My account information has changed and I want to verify my holdings.

Unfortunately there is a limit to the ability of any Company as to what we can possibly achieve on behalf of our shareholders. A suitable metaphor would be “Imagine that you purchase a car from Ford Motor Company. The car starts to run poorly when you put straight leaded gasoline into it despite the fact that the user’s manual indicates that premium unleaded gas is required for proper operation. Would you then expect Ford Motor Company to clean your engine for you?”

In a similar manner the Company can make no representation as to the capability of any third party brokerage house with respect to their proper handling of share accounts. If you have been a victim of some improper handling of your share account by a third party brokerage house, this is a matter to be taken up with the securities enforcement division of the proper oversight agency for the jurisdiction your account is held in.

If you are holding shares in certificate form and you would like to redeem those shares once the dividends are issued, you need only await the distribution of the dividends. Once the dividends issuance is completed, your new certificates will be mailed to you at the address on record. If your address of record has changed in the interim please notify the Transfer Agent to Fortress by letter stating the name on the certificate and inform them what the address of record was and what the address of record should now be. You may find the transfer agents mailing address at the website www.fortfinancegroup.com under Contact”.

If you are holding shares of Fortress common stock in an active brokerage account, the actual delivery of share dividends must occur through the Depository Trust Corporation (DTC) which is the independent agency responsible for the handling of all transfer of stock held in brokerage accounts for United States publically traded stocks. This agency holds all account records for shares held on deposit in accounts for US issuers. When a dividend is issued the DTC will automatically deliver the correctly apportioned share amounts to each shareholder of record directly to their brokerage account.

In respect of the 3% annual dividend, what is the mechanism that triggers this event?

NMGL cannot pay a dividend to its own stockholders of its common stock from any profits derived from either Bouse Gold, Inc. or from South Copperstone, Inc. until the 3% dividend for that year has first been paid to the holders of the NMGL Preferred Series “A” and Series “B” shares.

The NMGL Board of Directors would presumably declare the dividend for a fiscal year once the earnings for that year, if any, were calculated and audited. So it would be payable annually, if this was ever to apply. We have absolutely no guidance from NMGL whatsoever in this respect.

Would NMGL be entitled to cancel these transactions for any reason?

NMGL is entitled to cancel these transactions should they deem these transactions to be of reputational risk to themselves. The agreements provide for such termination by NMGL in the event of any litigation against Fortress or Western or any regulatory actions against Fortress. Damaging and libelous statements publicly leveled at NMGL, its Directors, Advisors and controlling stockholders could also trigger such termination. In the event of NMGL terminating these agreements, Fortress and Western have been advised by Searchlight Exploration, LLC that Searchlight Exploration, LLC would in likelihood exercise its rights and remedies to terminate its Agreements and reclaim all of the Bouse Gold, Inc. and South Copperstone, Inc. properties as it is legally entitled to do so.

Furthermore, Searchlight Exploration, LLC amended the critical terms of its agreements with Bouse Gold, Inc. and South Copperstone, Inc. to facilitate a sale of these properties by NMGL. These amendments by Searchlight Exploration were subject to both Bouse Gold, Inc. and South Copperstone, Inc. being owned by NMGL and that Fortress was no longer a direct stockholder in either corporation. If NMGL was to cancel this transaction for whatsoever reason with Western / Fortress, it would be in a position to do so up until the date that Fortress declared the dividend distribution of these NMGL Preferred Series “A” and Series “B” shares.

How are the holders of the NMGL Preferred Series “A” and Series “B” shares protected from an NMGL Bankruptcy?

The designations, preferences and rights that exist in the NMGL Preferred Series “A” and Series “B” shares protect the holders of those instruments in the event of a bankruptcy of NMGL as both Bouse Gold, Inc. and South Copperstone, Inc. are held by NMGL for the benefit of those holders of the NMGL Preferred Series “A” and the Series “B” shares. The Preferred stockholders get first rights over these assets in the event of a bankruptcy and enjoy privileges in respect of Bouse Gold, Inc. and South Copperstone, Inc. That is not a privilege extended to the holders of NMGL shares of common stock.

No NMGL Preferred Series “A” and Series “B” shares may be redeemed prior to January 1st, 2011. What is the process by which shares may be redeemed after that date and can shareholders elect to redeem a percentage of shares?

On or after January 1, 2011, NMGL may at its sole and absolute discretion redeem all or part of either of the Preferred Series “A” shares or the Preferred Series “B” shares for cash. This is at the discretion of the NMGL Board of Directors and there is absolutely no possibility that NMGL has any intention whatsoever of considering any such actions at that time. NMGL, at this time, considers these transactions as a mere “warehousing” exercise, their intention is to obtain 100% ownership of both Bouse Gold, Inc. and South Copperstone, Inc. over a period of time, to then use their best efforts to dispose of both Bouse Gold, Inc. and South Copperstone, Inc. and if successful, NMGL would then redeem the Preferred Series “A” and the Preferred Series “B” shares for cash and at their face value.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Just a little short? I wouldn't want to be, at all~ 



SevenTenEleven 

Tuesday, June 12, 2012 9:19:14 PM

Re: Rocket Man post# 201915

Post # of 201917

The criminals naked short sold FFGO from $4 per share to no bid!

They should be on the hook for just as much!

PLUS CRIMINAL PROSECUTION!


Quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"Add on another $1 to $4 per share to prevent criminal prosecution of the bankers, brokers, and market makers who all conspired to commit fraud ...." That is either the compounding of a felony or misprision, which in most jurisdictions is in itself a felony. It is not legal to extort money for forbearance of prosecution.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Tic Toc!



Rocket Man 

Tuesday, June 12, 2012 9:26:02 PM

Re: SevenTenEleven post# 201917

Post # of 201918

On the hook is one thing, but I think a crab pod is more of a trap that they can;t get out of in FFGO with WD& NMGL.. Ronnie with a nice portion of the lions share will need to help real the catch up!

This depicts the hardiness of what is in NGMCL via WD..

http://www.youtube.com/watch_popup?v=T4FIS1FnOQg



SevenTenEleven 

Tuesday, June 12, 2012 9:31:05 PM

Re: Rocket Man post# 201918

Post # of 201919

I am grateful to those pointing out the legal angle.

Those criminals, stealing from FFGO and its shareholders, CAN'T just pay up for what they stole.

They also have to be prosecuted!

So not only should they pay back the $4 per share they initially started naked short selling from, but they should also face prison time.


Quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"Add on another $1 to $4 per share to prevent criminal prosecution of the bankers, brokers, and market makers who all conspired to commit fraud ...." That is either the compounding of a felony or misprision, which in most jurisdictions is in itself a felony. It is not legal to extort money for forbearance of prosecution.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



Rocket Man 

Tuesday, June 12, 2012 9:36:59 PM

Re: SevenTenEleven post# 201919

Post # of 201926

Nothing wrong with Jail Time for criminals, FFGO has billions of shares per FINRA short. Sting operations can take years, see recent news in another miner for how long it takes of chump change compared to what FFGO has for over 2 years.. That cold winter day is a kicker.. 02/17/2011..



SevenTenEleven 

Tuesday, June 12, 2012 9:42:13 PM

Re: Rocket Man post# 201920

Post # of 201926

Should have went with TwoSeventeenEleven! LOL!

This escort know they are short and they know there is little time!

Behavior today demonstrated by TDA is a good example.

Tic Toc



stoprun   

Tuesday, June 12, 2012 9:43:45 PM

Re: tatoo1 post# 201854

Post # of 201926

Sorry, I was out of town today, they did the same thing with me,when I called about the net change in my account, he said could not explain why that happended, but asked me twice, if I wanted him to remove FFGO from my account, he was more interested in trying to let him remove FFGO from my account, than he was trying to explain the net change in my account. I told him that removing FFGO from my account was the last thing that I wanted to happen. Awful strange things going on with TDA and the FFGO stock, I believe the noose is tightening around somepeople's neck and they are about to have a swinging time. Good Luck!



SevenTenEleven 

Tuesday, June 12, 2012 9:49:01 PM

Re: stoprun post# 201922

Post # of 201926

I doubt TDA is just working the phones to get shareholders to take 100% losses for FFGO!

I would not put anything past them. How many stocks have they restricted buying on, while they were only allowing selling?

Wonder if the DOJ will take the Cubs away from the Ricketts if they find out their little brokerage house was potentially a holding tank for billions of dollars worth of naked short sold illegal book entries?

Tic Toc




tatoo1   

Tuesday, June 12, 2012 9:55:07 PM

Re: stoprun post# 201922

Post # of 201926

Yup, stoprun. same situation here. And the telling part was there were a few others in the account that were not trading , but he was adamant about FFGO. Hope to get the dividend soon.



SevenTenEleven 

Tuesday, June 12, 2012 9:58:44 PM

Re: tatoo1 post# 201924

Post # of 201926

When a broker screws their retail customers, they really hate when the retail customers screw them back.

TDA needs shareholders to take write-off in a bad way!

Wonder why?



tatoo1   

Tuesday, June 12, 2012 10:00:01 PM

Re: SevenTenEleven post# 201923

Post # of 201926

Had a few of those as well. And when I questioned them I was told to call the company itself. Got a bit of a runaround on those.



BMFL<OD

next week(s) is here

Who's Next!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BfuWXRZe9yA

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pQBLi5mukmI


Shortmans Anthem!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fRge7lXu56

Last edited by Bull Finch (2012-06-12 21:43:40)

Fortress Financial Group (fka FFGO)

Moderators:underdog150, SevenTenEleven, Rocket Man, Vianna, TomSawyer, Mike2211

http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/board.aspx?board_id=3111



stoprun


Wednesday, June 13, 2012 7:54:44 AM

Re: alien42 post# 201930

Post # of 201931

If that were true, then why is shorty still here posting 24/7/365, this stock no longer trades, so who is shorty protecting now with all of their negative posting., the only one I can see is, it must be "shorty"!!!!! No one will ever answer one simple question, "why is shorty still here, if this revoked stock has no chance of ever receiving divy"?


AlanC

Wednesday, June 13, 2012 9:26:05 AM

Re: SevenTenEleven post# 201902

Post # of 201988

Think about this FFGO longs. Everyone should want to see FFGO live up to their promises and deliver the dividend to the shareholders. Why would anyone not want to see this happen? Why wouldn't everyone want to see FFGO management proven to be honest upstanding individuals who did all they could to insure that investors not only received back their entire investment but made a great return on their invested dollars? Shouldn't everyone want to see FFGO deliver what they promised? I could understand that some folks may be sorry they sold their shares however even then they should be happy for those of us who hung in and had a big payday. Not only that once the payment news is announced there are other sister companies still trading that they now knowing management delivers on their promises can still invest in.

Think of all the good that will come from FFGO investors receiving their dividends that will occur. Costly lessons will be learned by those that broke the law and that too is a good thing as hopefully they will learn from this costly mistake and never do it in the future. This can be a win win win situation for management, shareholders and the regulators and even those that broke the law can benefit from a costly mistake so lets all look at all the positives that can occur as a result of the brilliant moves conceived and implemented by FFGO management to protect all who put their money at risk. Go FFGO!!!

Dividends of 3400%+ are worth waiting for!




SevenTenEleven 

Wednesday, June 13, 2012 9:47:42 AM

Re: 52wkhi post# 201933

Post # of 201988

FFGO - $0.007 to $4 PLUS! The PLUS is jail time for the naked short sellers!


Quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"Add on another $1 to $4 per share to prevent criminal prosecution of the bankers, brokers, and market makers who all conspired to commit fraud ...." That is either the compounding of a felony or misprision, which in most jurisdictions is in itself a felony. It is not legal to extort money for forbearance of prosecution.




SevenTenEleven 

Wednesday, June 13, 2012 11:15:15 AM

Re: None

Post # of 201988

FFGO - How short are TDA and ST in FFGO?

Sure hope they have their insurance current!

Attempts to get shareholders to take 100% losses ahead of a planned 3449% distribution by the company not as successful as they had hoped!

Ask TDA and ST to put in writing what a revocation of SEC registration does to your shares. Ask them to put a stamp on that letter and put it in the mail.

Will be interesting to see if they will be willing to incriminate themselves.

Tic Toc




OldBen 

Wednesday, June 13, 2012 12:13:17 PM

Re: alien42 post# 201878

Post # of 201988

Depends on how they ask.TDA is not breaking the law by asking their clients if they would like to remove worthless revoked stocks from their accounts.

the suggestion that they are is beyond absurd.

If TDA or others use the word "worthless" in verbal or written communications, they could be breaking the law. They better stick to "revoked" or "not trading."




SevenTenEleven

Wednesday, June 13, 2012 12:29:36 PM

Re: OldBen post# 201942

Post # of 201988

I am going to contact ETrade, ST, and TDA. Will ask them to put in writing that they do not have any unreported short interest for FFGO.

Let's see if they are willing to do so and put a stamp on it.

Tic Toc




OldBen 

Wednesday, June 13, 2012 1:09:37 PM

Re: puppydotcom post# 201946

Post # of 201988

Context is critical here. Advising someone to remove shares of a revoked stock that is not trading pertains to the immediate present tense. Many people such as myself have 401K accounts that are tax deferred, so writing off shares of FFGO would serve no tax purpose anyways.

Advising clients to write off shares that in many cases have no tax consequences serves no purpose to the client.

If TDA or others have knowledge that FFGO had a pre-existing short position prior to revocation would be bad for TDA. If TDA knows that FFGO could come out of revocation that would be bad for TDA. If TDA knows that FFGO can still deliver a dividend while in revocation that would be bad for TDA.

Advising clients to write off shares with any knowledge of possible profitable future events while providing in most cases NO tax or other benefit certainly begs the question of legality and vested interest to me.




OldBen 

Wednesday, June 13, 2012 1:19:38 PM

Re: medchal post# 201948

Post # of 201988

Please explain the advantage of writing off shares in tax deferred accounts?? Why should the broker's "representative" be "frustrated." If the client believes he will receive a future benefit from the shares, then why shouldn't the broker support that if the shares are "worthless" anyways.




OldBen 

Wednesday, June 13, 2012 1:46:21 PM

Re: alien42 post# 201951

Post # of 201988

Comparing a brokerage firm that has 100% clients that contain 100% revoked penny stocks to a brokerage firm that has 100% clients that trade 100% unrevoked stocks is absurd.

We are talking of one single company, FFGO. In this case, what is the advantage of removing shares in a tax deferred account?

Any damage is already done. Actually removing the shares would serve no purpose as the shares could become "unrevoked" and could receive a dividend or a NSS settlement. A cautionary tale to future purchases of potential revoked stocks by the broker to the client might be in order.

Or the broker could refer the client to this website, there are plenty of daily cautionary tales here LOL




OldBen 

Wednesday, June 13, 2012 2:21:07 PM

Re: alien42 post# 201954

Post # of 201988

imagine two situations, the first is a brokerage whose clients accounts contain a bunch of revoked penny stock scam garbage like FFGO and the second is a brokerage who has helped their clients accounts stay clean with valid stocks that actually trade.

You didn't "say" 100%, but, 100% is 100% implied.

We are talking of one single company, FFGO. In this case, what is the advantage of removing shares in a tax deferred account?

what is the advantage of a brokerage not taking out the trash?

The advantage is the fact, however small or non-existant you might believe it to be, that you could be wrong. FFGO could deliver a dividend and/or have a NSS settlement.




varmit 

Wednesday, June 13, 2012 2:31:01 PM

Re: None

Post # of 201988

FFGO fresh off the phone w/ e-trade ...

asking me to write off shares to clean out the account and have a tax write off !!!

why its months until tax time ,,,almost a year in fact ,,,

my reply !!! no thanks : i will wait for my .007 -4.60 dividend come record date ....

seems odd to ask me to write off shares anyway......i have several other revolked stocks in my account and they never ask to write them off .....cmkx/ estt/ etc ...

so sumtin is up !!!!! yes indeed ,,, gold is up and keeps going up ......always will.

record date tells all !!!!!! varmy cares



OldBen

In reply to: alien42 who wrote msg# 201958 Date:6/13/2012 2:48:30 PM

Post #201962 of 201972

If I use risk management and invest only small percentages in risky penny stocks such as FFGO, then why is there a HUGE concern if I chose one bad stock pick? If one believes that there is a 99% chance that FFGO may not pay a dividend or a NSS settlement, then that is not enough. We must be forced to believe 100% that FFGO is a total scam that will never pay out anything ever. We can argue over that 1% til the cows come home. Why? I have grown my 401K over 60% this year. Because, I picked FFGO in 2009, am I going to pick "worthless" penny stocks?

Any broker would be a fool to advise me to remove any of my FFGO shares. At this point, there are only advantages to keeping FFGO stock.

I appreciate you and others caring about FFGO long shareholders and protecting us from dangerous penny stock "scams."



AlanC

Wednesday, June 13, 2012 3:03:27 PM

Re: OldBen post# 201949

Post # of 201988

OldBen: Spot on! The brokerage firms should be thrilled for their clients if those shares have value. In fact if their FFGO shareowning clients all receive a substantial dividend it will not only increase the value of their clients accounts but it should benefit the brokerage firms as well. Of course if the brokerage firms have markers in their clients accounts rather than real shares they have a problem since they will be the one paying their clients that dividend. Go FFGO!!!
Dividends of 3400%+ are worth waiting for!




OldBen 

Wednesday, June 13, 2012 3:15:30 PM

Re: AlanC post# 201964

Post # of 201988

Absolutely. Imagine how many trades (commissions for brokers) could be put on say, $100,000 in FFGO profits. You would likely buy and sell many different positions. This whole argument for removing shares should be put to rest once and for all on this simple fact alone.


varmit

In reply to: varmit who wrote msg# 201959 Date:6/13/2012 2:33:37 PM

Post #201960 of 201967

ffgo maybe class in session


when u r in the billion share club they look at u different .....

maybe a threat ... thats alota shares they could negotiate a buyback at say a buck a share ,,,,,, before paying the 4.60 a share later ...what a bargain ....

varmit says

upper class dismissed



SevenTenEleven 

Wednesday, June 13, 2012 3:44:30 PM

Re: varmit post# 201959

Post # of 201988

I will be contacting a number of brokers and requesting that they put in writing that they have the certs to back up the shares of FFGO they sold, prior to the revocation.

Then I will request that they put a stamp on that letter and send it via USPS!

Tic Toc




SevenTenEleven 

Wednesday, June 13, 2012 3:45:36 PM

Re: varmit post# 201959

Post # of 201988

They could remove my shares for $1.60 per share. That is a $3 per share discount from where they initially started naked short selling from.

Tic Toc



OldBen

Wednesday, June 13, 2012 3:57:53 PM

Re: alien42 post# 201967

Post # of 201973

What "problem"?? Any damage has already been done. If we believe some "lies of the scammers," then what damage is occurring in regards to future investments and profits. Any cautionary tales have already been spoken. There is no point arguing over whether there will or will not be a dividend or NSS settlement. There is no money to invest or "lose." We should all be wishing each other the best of luck and encouraging each other to hold on to our shares however likely or unlikely the odds of receiving a dividend or NSS settlement.



OldBen 

Wednesday, June 13, 2012 4:01:49 PM

Re: SevenTenEleven post# 201969

Post # of 201988

I applaud the effort. I am not sure what leverage that you will have to make them comply to the request. They may make some verbal remarks that may be telling or interesting. Great job...

I do understand that brokers should be able to prove that what they sold you is REAL. Though, we don't have the legal precedent to force them to comply, yet. I am sure that they would not be brave enough to put in writing that the shares of FFGO they sold are real.




SevenTenEleven 

Wednesday, June 13, 2012 4:17:29 PM

Re: OldBen post# 201974

Post # of 201988

The ruling in California a few weeks back will make ETrade think twice about putting incorrect information in writing about FFGO. If they claim that they have certs to back up our shares, then they should be able to issue those certs to shareholders per their request. I highly doubt they have the certs to back 20% of the inventory they have allowed to be deposited in their customers' accounts.

There is a reason why the brokers are getting very aggressive suggesting shareholders should take a 100% loss.

Tic Toc

wrenchman

Wednesday, June 13, 2012 4:41:26 PM

Re: None

Post # of 201980

UMMMM this is interesting and relevant to the conversations on this board like Brokers suggestions and who has more power and that is the state see below!!!

http://www.mondaq.com/unitedstates/x/180640/Structured+Finance/FINRAs+New+Guidance+Relating+To+Suitability+Potential+Impact+On+Structured+Products

On May 21, 2012, FINRA issued Regulatory Notice 12-25, in which FINRA provided additional guidance on its new suitability rule, FINRA Rule 2111. The notice may be found at:

http://www.finra.org/web/groups/industry/@ip/@reg/@notice/documents/notices/p126431.pdf .

The additional guidance responds to industry questions about Rule 2111. Some of the additional guidance applies to sales practices in the structured products industry; we discuss that guidance below.1 The new notice reminds the industry that many of the obligations under the new suitability rules are the same as under the predecessor rules. However, the new Q&A's provide some useful indications of FINRA's views on a variety of questions that brokers frequently must address.
Acting in a Customer's Best Interests

A broker's recommendation of a security must be consistent with his or her customer's best interests.2 The suitability requirement that a broker make only those recommendations that are consistent with the customer's best interests prohibits a broker from placing the broker's interests ahead of the customer's interests.3 In answer to a question about the meaning of acting "in a customer's best interests," FINRA provided examples where brokers had violated the suitability rule by placing their interests ahead of the customer's.

One example, which would apply to structured products and any other type of security, was a broker whose motivation for recommending one product over another was to receive larger commissions.4 FINRA noted that the cost associated with a recommendation is only one of many important factors to consider when determining whether the subject security or investment strategy involving a security or securities is suitable.5 Steering an investor to an investment solely due to its profitability for the firm or the broker would be problematic under the suitability rules. If the recommendation is suitable for the customer and the broker is not placing the broker's interests ahead of the customer's, then the broker would not be obligated to recommend a product with the lowest commission.

When assessing whether a recommendation is in the customer's best interests, in addition to the customer's investment profile, product or strategy-related factors must also be considered. One product-related characteristic is "special or unusual features," which are present in many structured products.6
Recommendations

In answer to a request to enumerate factors to consider in determining whether a recommendation has been made for purposes of Rule 2111, FINRA pointed to existing FINRA and SEC guidance as to particular communications that could be viewed as recommendations. FINRA highlighted that "a broker-dealer's use or distribution of marketing or offering materials ordinarily would not, by itself, constitute a 'recommendation' for purposes of the suitability rule."7 Accordingly, consistent with the understanding of practitioners, the brochures and marketing materials used by many broker-dealers relating to structured products would typically not on their own (in the absence of other communications) be deemed to be "recommendations."
Investment Strategies

In response to a request for a description of a suitable investment strategy, FINRA responded by explaining that a broker's recommendation that a customer generally invest in equities or fixed income securities would not be an investment strategy covered by Rule 2111, unless that recommendation was part of an asset allocation plan not eligible for the safe harbor provisions of Rule 2111.03. However, FINRA pointed out that the rule would apply to recommendations to "invest in more specific types of securities, such as high dividend companies or 'Dogs of the Dow' ...."8 The "Dogs of the Dow" strategy is premised on investing "equal dollar amounts in the ten constituents of the Dow Jones industrial average with the highest dividend yields, hold[ing] them for twelve months and then switch[ing] to a new group of dogs."9

As a result, a recommendation to invest in many types of structured products could trigger the requirement that the investment strategy be suitable under Rule 2111. A recommendation as to a structured product could fall into two categories of the suitability requirements – the security itself and the strategy that the security reflects.

The "investment strategy" language also covers broker's recommendations for investing in both a security and a non-security.10 Consequently, a recommendation as to an investment strategy that involved purchases of structured certificates of deposit as part of an investment portfolio would be subject to the rule, even though structured certificates of deposit are typically not "securities."
Risk-Based Approach to Documenting Compliance With Suitability Obligations

In order to make an appropriate determination of suitability, a member or associated person must ascertain the customer's investment profile. Rule 2111.04 provides that a member or associated person must use reasonable diligence to obtain and analyze all of the investment profile factors included in Rule 2111(a), unless the member or associated person has a reasonable basis to believe, documented with specificity, that one or more of those factors are not relevant components of a customer's investment profile in light of the particular facts and circumstances.

FINRA provided examples of complex securities or investment strategies that would require documentation under Rule 2111.04. While large-cap, value–oriented equity securities would usually not require documentation, a complex and/or potentially risky security or investment strategy involving a security or securities usually would require documentation.11 FINRA cited earlier Regulatory Notices and cases relating to complex and/or potentially risky securities or investment strategies involving a security or securities; those notices and cases related to, among others, commodity futures-linked securities, reverse exchangeable or reverse convertible securities, principal-protected notes, leveraged and inverse exchange-traded funds and structured products.12

With respect to an investment strategy involving an explicit recommendation to hold a security, firms should consider documenting recommendations to hold securities "that by their nature or due to particular circumstances could be viewed as having a shorter-term investment component; that have a periodic reset or similar mechanism that could alter a product's character over time ...."13 Examples include leveraged exchange-traded funds, due to daily reset features causing their performance over long periods to differ significantly from the performance of the underlying index or benchmark over the same period.14 The same concern would most likely apply to exchange-traded notes with similar features.

Consequently, firms not currently doing so may wish to plan to document their recommended securities and investment strategies involving structured products.
Reasonable-Basis Suitability

The Rule 2111.05(a) reasonable-basis obligation contains two components, diligence on the nature of the recommended security and a determination of whether the recommendation is suitable for at least some investors. What happens if the broker does not understand the risks associated with a recommendation, even if that recommendation is suitable for some investors?

FINRA stated that "rokers cannot fulfill their suitability responsibilities ... when they fail to understand the securities and investment strategies they recommend."15 Given that FINRA views most structured products as potentially complex, firms' supervisory policies and procedures must be reasonably designed to ensure that brokers understand the structured products that they recommend so that brokers can comply with their reasonable-basis obligation.
Institutional Investor Exemption

Rule 2111(b) provides an exemption from the customer-specific suitability obligation for certain institutional accounts, which focuses on two factors: "(1) whether a broker 'has a reasonable basis to believe that the institutional customer is capable of evaluating investment risks independently, both in general and with regard to particular transactions and investment strategies involving a security or securities' ... and (2) whether 'the institutional customer affirmatively indicates that it is exercising independent judgment' .... A broker-dealer fulfills its customer-specific suitability obligation if all of these conditions are satisfied."16

FINRA noted that some institutional customers may not, in some cases, be capable of understanding a particular type of instrument or its risk. "If a customer is either generally not capable of evaluating investment risk or lacks sufficient capability to evaluate the particular product or investment strategy that is the subject of the recommendation, the scope of a broker's customer-specific obligations under the suitability rule would not be diminished by the fact that the broker was dealing with an institutional customer."17

Consequently, when brokers are selling structured products, which FINRA generally views as complex, to institutional customers, they should take extra care in ensuring that they are in compliance with the exception provided by Rule 2111(b).

In Regulatory Notice 12-25, FINRA confirmed that (1) it has not approved or endorsed any third-party institutional suitability certificates, (2) it has not contracted with any vendors to create such certificates on FINRA's behalf and (3) the use of such certificates does not constitute a safe harbor from Rule 2111.18 FINRA also said that "broker-dealers are not required to use such certificates to comply with the new institutional-customer exemption."19

In particular, if a broker is selling structured products to institutional customers, the broker should ensure that the conditions of the Rule 2111(b) exceptions are met rather than relying solely on the customer completing an institutional suitability certificate. If a broker is relying on an oral affirmation, as opposed to a written one, it should consider having procedures in place to document the fact that it has received the affirmation.
FINRA's Consent Agreements Target Supervisory Systems and Procedures in the Sale of Non-Traditional ETFs
Introduction

On May 1, 2012, the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority, Inc. ("FINRA") announced that it had fined four major investment banks for a total of more than $9.1 million dollars for the sale of leveraged and inverse exchange-traded funds ("Non-Traditional ETFs) without reasonable supervision and for not having a reasonable basis for recommending the sales.20 Prior to the announcement, FINRA had entered into Letters of Acceptance, Waiver and Consent with each of the broker-dealers that were fined (the "Consent Agreements").21 The Consent Agreements outlined disciplinary actions which include censures, fines and restitution.

In its press release dated May 1, 2012 and the Consent Agreements, FINRA points out that leveraged and inverse ETFs often contain features such as daily reset, leveraging and compounding, which results in very different performance as compared to the performance of the related underlying indices, especially when held over longer periods. Because of these features and the complexity of these instruments, FINRA has carefully scrutinized whether FINRA members are satisfying their duties with respect to investor suitability and broker supervision. FINRA previously indicated that it was reviewing Non-Traditional ETFs, in its Regulatory Notice 09-31 (June 2009).22

We note that FINRA's actions in connection to these four firms focus on sales and supervision activities that occurred between January 2008 and June 2009, prior to FINRA's Regulatory Notice 09-31.
1. A Firm Must Establish a Reasonable Supervisory System

FINRA criticized each of the firms for failing to establish reasonable supervisory systems in connection with the sale of Non-Traditional ETFs. FINRA found that the firms' standard supervisory procedures that apply to ETFs in general were not sufficient for Non-Traditional ETFs. In order to be considered reasonable, supervisory procedures need to be tailored specifically to address the unique features and risks associated with Non-Traditional ETFs, such as the differences in performance expectations when these instruments are held over longer periods.
2. A Firm Must Provide Adequate Training

FINRA also criticized the firms for failing to provide adequate training for its representatives and supervisors on the features of Non-Traditional ETFs. FINRA requires that guidance and tools to educate representatives and supervisors about Non-Traditional ETFs must also be specifically tailored to the product.
3. A Firm Must Not Make Unsuitable Recommendations

The Consent Agreements indicated that the firms violated NASD Rule 2310, as well as NASD 2110 and FINRA Rule 2010, by recommending Non-Traditional ETFs to customers with conservative investment objectives and to customers with a primary objective of income investment. FINRA cited the firms for not performing reasonable diligence so as to understand the nature of the security recommended for purchase, as well as its risks and rewards. Furthermore, firms must understand each customer's tolerance for risk, performance expectations and intended holding periods.
Conclusion

The circumstances surrounding the alleged violations are particular to the facts described in the various Consent Agreements. There is, however, a common theme in many of FINRA's recent decisions with regards to establishing adequate supervisory policies and procedures specific to the behavior and risks of the structured product offered to retail customers, including Non-Traditional ETFs. Because some exchange-traded notes ("ETNs") have the same characteristics as Non-Traditional ETFs, the same concerns relating to supervision, training and investor suitability should also apply to sales of ETNs with leverage and/or inverse returns. It has been reported that FINRA is looking into ETN sales practices in the wake of the recent VelocityShares Daily 2x VIX Short Term ETN (TVIX) trading price crash. Many firms may need to carefully devise and review supervisory policies and procedures to suit different types of risks associated with various types of structured products.
Massachusetts Fines Broker Dealer for Sales of Non-Traditional ETFs

FINRA and the SEC are not the only U.S. regulators who are paying careful attention to the structured products market. In recent years, state regulators have taken a more active role in regulating structured product sales in their respective states. Several significant ones have been conducting a review of the market, and soliciting information from issuers and broker-dealers about their activities.

At about the same time as FINRA announced the consent agreements described in the previous article, the Massachusetts Securities Division (the "Division") announced that it had entered into a consent order with a broker-dealer relating to its sales of leveraged ETFs in the state.23 The proceeding had been initially announced in July 2011.

The Division's findings and concerns are quite similar to those discussed in the FINRA consent agreements, and the Division brought the proceeding under the authority of relevant Massachusetts laws.24 The sales at issue took place during the period from October 2007 to December 2009. The sales and practices described in the Massachusetts consent order raise somewhat similar concerns as to suitability, supervision and training as those of the FINRA consent agreements

The consent agreement required the broker-dealer to reimburse the relevant Massachusetts investors for their losses, and to pay an administrative fine of $250,000. The market may see similar actions, as Massachusetts and other regulators continue their efforts.


wrenchman

Wednesday, June 13, 2012 5:01:36 PM

Re: None

Post # of 201983

And more on that subject!FFGO shareholders do you want us to get rid of them for you LOL new laws are a great thing!!

http://tcbblogs.org/governance/2011/08/09/ey-survey-uniform-standard-for-broker-dealers-finra-rules-worrisome/

In my conversation with Reich last week, she reiterated what the SEC study found: “many retail investors do not understand and are confused by the roles played by investment advisers and broker-dealers.” The study went on to say that many investors are confused by how the standards of care apply to investment advisers and broker-dealers when providing personalized investment advice about securities.



wrenchman 

Wednesday, June 13, 2012 5:07:52 PM

Re: A deleted message

Post # of 201988

NSS i say yes!!!

Allocation of Customers' Fully Paid and Excess Margin Securities to Short Positions. The SEC proposes to add a new paragraph (d)(4) to Rule 15c3-3, requiring an additional action with respect to retrieving securities from non-control positions when the broker-dealer needs to obtain possession or control over a specific issue and class of securities. The broker-dealer would be required to take prompt steps to obtain physical possession or control over securities of the same issue and class as those included on the broker-dealer's books as a proprietary short position or as a short position for another person. A broker-dealer required to obtain physical possession or control over the security would no longer be able to monetize the value of the security and use the cash for proprietary activities.




OldBen 

Wednesday, June 13, 2012 5:31:19 PM

Re: SevenTenEleven post# 201977

Post # of 201988

Agreed. Asking if they have available certs could be very interesting. You may be able to get somewhere even if you never take delivery of any certs.




tatoo1   

Wednesday, June 13, 2012 5:55:53 PM

Re: newtrader2007 post# 201963

Post # of 201988

Just curious. What are you basing the ownership of shares. After allowing TDA too remove them from your account. Is it the fact they were not sold. Or what?




SevenTenEleven 

Wednesday, June 13, 2012 6:32:59 PM

Re: tatoo1 post# 201986

Post # of 201988

If you allow TDA to remove them from your account, you lose your equity position. Those on the hook for those electronic markers will be able to close out their naked short position. If it is TDA, they just take the IOU's off their books. If it is NITE or PNSN, then they close out their position.

Claims that you still own them are not correct, in fact, they are completely false, if you allow TDA to remove them.

As long as they remain in your account, you are still an equity shareholders of Fortress Financial.

Tic Toc



BMFL<OD

next week(s) is here

Who's Next!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BfuWXRZe9yA

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pQBLi5mukmI


Shortmans Anthem!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fRge7lXu56

Fortress Financial Group (fka FFGO)

Moderators:underdog150, SevenTenEleven, Rocket Man, Vianna, TomSawyer, Mike2211

http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/board.aspx?board_id=3111



North American Gold & Minerals Fund (NMGL)

Moderators:AlanC, SevenTenEleven, Rocket Man, Texan77, Bull Finch

http://investorshub.advfn.com/North-American-Gold-&-Minerals-Fund-NMGL-16265/



IT WON'T LAST LONG...

SevenTenEleven

Thursday, June 14, 2012 9:06:55 AM

Re: medchal post# 202003

Post # of 202005

No, adding a period won't make a false statement true, and your statement is false. Removing a security (or any other asset or liability) from an accounting system does not extinguish the ownership interest in it. Railing about it on a message board does not, as I said, change common law or statute law, both of which are contrary to your statement. (Period.) - medchal

Sorry, but ETrade just confirmed that if they were to remove FFGO from my account per my request, that I would give up any rights or claims to the shares.

I feel sorry for anyone who would lose everything by doing so, thinking they received advice from an industry professional, making claim on a message board.

WARNING TO SHAREHOLDERS:

IF YOU AGREE TO ALLOW YOUR BROKER TO REMOVE YOUR SHARES OF FFGO FROM YOUR ACCOUNT AS WORTHLESS, YOU LOSE YOUR SHARES!

PLEASE CONTACT YOUR BROKER TO CONFIRM!

YOUR BROKER MAY TRY TO CONVINCE YOU TO TAKE THE WRITE DOWN!

UNLESS THERE IS DOCUMENTATION PROVING THAT THE DIVIDEND PROCESS HAS BEEN CANCELED, THEN ANYONE DOING SO, GIVES UP THEIR CLAIM TO 3449% OR MORE ROI.

CLAIMS THAT YOU STILL RETAIN OWNERSHIP OF YOUR FFGO SHARES, IF WRITEN DOWN, ARE COMPLETELY FALSE AND MISLEADING!

GOOD LUCK!




SevenTenEleven

Thursday, June 14, 2012 9:10:07 AM

Re: fourkids_9pets post# 10074

Post # of 10080

Interesting to say the least...

Quote:
I spoke with ETRADE a while ago about this and they said they would buy my shares back for .01 yes for all of my shares i kinda laughed at them so then it would be a purchase then they could close out the position!LOL no thanks - wrenchman

It is a dead sure certainty that E*Trade did not offer to buy any shares of FFGO for a penny, as you state. How any kind of conversation on this matter could be twisted into that interpretation is a mystery. If the offer was for $ 0.0001 (or $ 0.00001, for that matter), you'd be well advised to take it. If you don't have too many shares, perhaps E*Trade is simply making the offer simply to close out the pointless discussion of the subject. - medchal



Quote:
If a retail investor agrees to have their shares of FFGO removed from their account, the no longer hold that position in FFGO! PERIOD!

Claims that they would still own or hold that position, once removed, is completely INCORRECT! - SevenTenEleven

"If you allow TDA to remove them from your account, you lose your equity position." No, you do not -- definitely, emphatically, and without qualification. It is nonsense like that which causes people to make bad decisions for the wrong reasons, and there is no reason for anyone to keep insisting on that nonsense as if his own whimsical opinion would override both common and statute law. - medchal



No, adding a period won't make a false statement true, and your statement is false. Removing a security (or any other asset or liability) from an accounting system does not extinguish the ownership interest in it. Railing about it on a message board does not, as I said, change common law or statute law, both of which are contrary to your statement. (Period.) - medchal

Sorry, but ETrade just confirmed that if they were to remove FFGO from my account per my request, that I would give up any rights or claims to the shares.

I feel sorry for anyone who would lose everything by doing so, thinking they received advice from an industry professional, making claim on a message board.

"Sorry, but ETrade just confirmed that if they were to remove FFGO from my account per my request, that I would give up any rights or claims to the shares." No they didn't, and I'm through with a discussion which consists of nothing other than more and more unsupported and unsupportable assertions on your part. Resorting to writing messages in red crayon and upper case letters will not change the facts any more than appeals to imaginary authority. - medchal


WARNING TO FFGO SHAREHOLDERS:

IF YOU AGREE TO ALLOW YOUR BROKER TO REMOVE YOUR SHARES OF FFGO FROM YOUR ACCOUNT AS WORTHLESS, YOU LOSE YOUR SHARES!

PLEASE CONTACT YOUR BROKER TO CONFIRM!

YOUR BROKER MAY TRY TO CONVINCE YOU TO TAKE THE WRITE DOWN!

UNLESS THERE IS DOCUMENTATION PROVING THAT THE DIVIDEND PROCESS HAS BEEN CANCELED, THEN ANYONE DOING SO, GIVES UP THEIR CLAIM TO 3449% OR MORE ROI.

CLAIMS THAT YOU STILL RETAIN OWNERSHIP OF YOUR FFGO SHARES, IF WRITEN DOWN, ARE COMPLETELY FALSE AND MISLEADING!

GOOD LUCK!



OldBen

Thursday, June 14, 2012 9:58:35 AM

Re: medchal post# 202007

Post # of 202010

Not only are you calling SevenTenEleven a liar, but, you are making assertions that are unsupportable and make no sense. Why would you remove FFGO share from your account? Why would a brokerage house support claims to shares that are not on any statements? That is so obvious and blatant. It makes no sense. It somehow makes more sense to call someone a liar?



Texan77   

Thursday, June 14, 2012 12:30:56 AM

Re: medchal post# 201990

Post # of 202046

so wheres the proof of ownership? cant waite for this explination


"If you allow TDA to remove them from your account, you lose your equity position." No, you do not -- definitely, emphatically, and without qualification. It is nonsense like that which causes people to make bad decisions for the wrong reasons, and there is no reason for anyone to keep insisting on that nonsense as if his own whimsical opinion would override both common and statute law.




Texan77   

Thursday, June 14, 2012 12:38:34 AM

Re: NYSERule282 post# 201995

Post # of 202046

dispare lol thats such a old move but old habits die hard and lol



Post # of 201998
Anyone get cash in their accounts on June 11th? WTF? I thought divs were supposed to paid on 6/11/12? What gives?




wrenchman 

Thursday, June 14, 2012 5:44:37 AM

Re: medchal post# 201990

Post # of 202046

I spoke with ETRADE a while ago about this and they said they would buy my shares back for .01 yes for all of my shares i kinda laughed at them so then it would be a purchase then they could close out the position!LOL no thanks




ken754

Monday, May 21, 2012 7:48:37 AM

Re: A deleted message

Post # of 202046

Well If the people at the SEC and FINRA are all in bed with the brokers and other institutional oversight people allowing and even aiding the nasty short sellers than who is left to get us anything back on our $$ and if they will be forced into doing this how long could it drag out before we see anything? I'm 51 now and in what I believe to be fairly decent health but I don't don't want my 3400% when I need a new heart and lungs for cripes sake! I think we've been had and what's worse I can't even let it alone in the dark. It just keeps coming back day after day to let me know it got me.

FRACK!!!




popeyemag   

Thursday, June 14, 2012 8:18:09 AM

Re: ken754 post# 200483

Post # of 202046

Guy helping me at the SEC is Trevor Perkins 1-800-732-0330. Case #00184103. You can call him or go to help@sec.gov. He did say the more complaints the better chance that it will be followed up on. He wouldn't tell me anything about the case because investigations are confidential.




SevenTenEleven 

Thursday, June 14, 2012 9:06:55 AM

Re: medchal post# 202003

Post # of 202046

No, adding a period won't make a false statement true, and your statement is false. Removing a security (or any other asset or liability) from an accounting system does not extinguish the ownership interest in it. Railing about it on a message board does not, as I said, change common law or statute law, both of which are contrary to your statement. (Period.) - medchal

Sorry, but ETrade just confirmed that if they were to remove FFGO from my account per my request, that I would give up any rights or claims to the shares.

I feel sorry for anyone who would lose everything by doing so, thinking they received advice from an industry professional, making claim on a message board.

WARNING TO SHAREHOLDERS:

IF YOU AGREE TO ALLOW YOUR BROKER TO REMOVE YOUR SHARES OF FFGO FROM YOUR ACCOUNT AS WORTHLESS, YOU LOSE YOUR SHARES!

PLEASE CONTACT YOUR BROKER TO CONFIRM!

YOUR BROKER MAY TRY TO CONVINCE YOU TO TAKE THE WRITE DOWN!

UNLESS THERE IS DOCUMENTATION PROVING THAT THE DIVIDEND PROCESS HAS BEEN CANCELED, THEN ANYONE DOING SO, GIVES UP THEIR CLAIM TO 3449% OR MORE ROI.

CLAIMS THAT YOU STILL RETAIN OWNERSHIP OF YOUR FFGO SHARES, IF WRITEN DOWN, ARE COMPLETELY FALSE AND MISLEADING!

GOOD LUCK!




OldBen 

Thursday, June 14, 2012 9:55:45 AM

Re: A deleted message

Post # of 202046

the brokerage will show the ownership, and removal of the shares, on the last statement on which the holding appears. Where's the "proof of ownership" of the shares which are not removed from your brokerage account right now? There is none, other than for the written documents issued by the broker.

When you receive a "last statement" of FFGO shares and it shows NO FFGO shares because it was removed, you are accepting the removal of the shares if you do nothing about it.

When you receive a statement from the bank showing withdrawals from your account and there is an error and too many funds were "removed" you would want to handle it immediately following receipt of the statement.

If you allow either statement to go 30 days past the statement, then you are accepting the loss of shares or money.

Any Brokerage firm would question an assertion of rights or claims to shares that don't show up on a statement.

Again, there is no advantage to removing shares. There is a possible dividend and NSS settlement. No one has shown a single reason to remove shares from an account.




SevenTenEleven 

Thursday, June 14, 2012 10:00:52 AM

Re: OldBen post# 202008

Post # of 202046

Agreed OldBen! If the broker removes the shares from one's account, with the owner of the account's approval, the owner of the account gives up his/her rights/claims to the shares and any dividends forthcoming.

FFGO Shares are still worth at least $0.003449 per share!

The Cusip # in our accounts, in lieu of the symbol FFGO, accounts for our ownership in the equivalent of a privately held company.




wrenchman 

Thursday, June 14, 2012 10:31:41 AM

Re: medchal post# 202006

Post # of 202047

Yes they did .01 for all not .01 per share lol no need for me to make things up home don't play that !




OldBen 

Thursday, June 14, 2012 10:43:01 AM

Re: medchal post# 202014

Post # of 202047

Clutter? The clutter that can pay a dividend and a NSS settlement and provide future commissions for the Brokerage house. Oh, that clutter... No decision should be based on the far-fetched belief that removing shares from your account does not remove ownership of the shares.


medchal

Thursday, June 14, 2012 10:47:59 AM

Re: OldBen post# 202017

Post # of 202019

Have it your way, Ben. Huge dividends and settlements coming, which you will somehow lose if your shares don't appear on some monthly statement.

Have a good time being combative with your broker, too; that should help you a lot in the long run!

Bye-bye.

OldBen 

Thursday, June 14, 2012 11:01:57 AM

Re: medchal post# 202018

Post # of 202048

Thanks, I have never been combative with any broker. In fact, I have gotten many compliments from my brokers. My broker finds this whole topic amusing and funny. Anything, but, combative. Humor does help me a lot in the long run! Thanks!




paunch13   

Thursday, June 14, 2012 11:17:35 AM

Re: NYSERule282 post# 202020

Post # of 202048

nyse
Ask etrade to pot that in writing that the divis would never be paid and I bet they wil refuse to do that
John




AlanC

Thursday, June 14, 2012 11:19:55 AM

Re: OldBen post# 202019

Post # of 202048

Our neighbor is making nice steady progress on their Copperstone claims:
American Bonanza Announces Progress at Copperstone Mine and Completion of a Gold Facility
PrintAlert

American Bonanza Gold Corp. (TSX:BZA)(OTCQX:ABGFF) ("Bonanza" or "Company") is pleased to announce a progress update at the high-grade Copperstone Mine during April 2012, and to announce that it has completed a second priority secured gold prepayment facility to support the successful ramp-up of the Copperstone Mine to full production.
Bonanza continues to make positive progress during its expected ramp-up stage as it approaches its objective of reaching design rates for mining and production. Performance during April represents a substantial improvement over the first quarter of 2012. Once at design rates, Bonanza will be able to announce commercial production. Current improvements during the ramp-up phase include:

1. Mill Performance - 5,455 tons were milled during April. On a day-to-day
basis, the mill has performed at design throughput rates and is capable
of running at these target rates. Increased through-put will be seen in
the coming months as the mine's ore tonnage to the processing plant
increases from the 'D', 'C' and 'North D' Zones. The target throughput
rate is 450 tons per day.

2. Recovery - 1,060 ounces gold was recovered in the mill during April,
which is approximately 35% of the monthly design rate for year one of
the mine life.

3. Overall Recovery Rate - stands at 85% for the full month of April. This
will further improve as the feed from the mine evens out over the
summer. The tailings grade is low at 0.036 ounces per ton, in line with
expectations.

4. Concentrate Shipment Grade - During April, the concentrates graded
between 48 and 54 ounces of gold per ton, which is several times higher
than design grades.

5. Gold Sales - preliminary gold sales in April of 1,186 ounces were
achieved, representing 40% of Year 1 monthly design rates. The gravity
concentrate is currently being sent to Metals Research in Idaho, and the
flotation concentrate to Global Metal Technologies in Spokane.

6. The Mine - 5,375 tons of ore was mined in April, which is approximately
180 tons per day, representing 40% of design output rates.

The mining activity is focusing on three zones. Within the next two or three months, these three zones will ensure that the mine has more than sufficient ore stopes available to achieve design output:

-- 'D' Zone - this zone has been the focus of the mining activity during
2012 and mining ore at higher rates will resume when current curing of
the backfill is completed shortly. The backfill activity had led to a
short-term drop in mine output.
-- 'C' Zone - stopes are currently under development and are expected to be
developed for the mining of ore within two weeks. The 'C Zone' will be
the second zone to be developed.
-- 'North D' Zone - a development heading is being driven out to 'North D
Zone' and is expected to arrive in approximately two months.

Gold Facility Details
In order for Bonanza to expedite the opening up of the 'North D' Zone and develop stopes in the 'C' Zone, plus improve equipment availability and the building of a spare parts inventory, Bonanza completed a second priority secured gold prepayment facility. The gold prepayment facility was completed with an arms-length Lender, whereby Bonanza has agreed to deliver 3,215 ounces of gold for delivery on June 1, 2015, for gross proceeds of US$4,501,000 (the "Facility").
The Facility will be repaid through the delivery of 3,215 ounces of gold (the "Gold") on June 1, 2015, subject to the Lender's option to receive the Gold or cash. The Gold that has been committed under this Facility represents approximately 1% of the measured and indicated mineral resources at the Copperstone gold mine.
The Facility is subject to optional early repayment by the Company after eight months have passed with a prepayment equal to the gross proceeds plus the outstanding interest which would become due until June 1, 2015, less interest previously paid. The Company will pay an interest rate of 12% per annum, commencing on July 1, 2012. The Facility is secured by a second priority charge over the personal property of the Company and the Company's wholly owned subsidiary, Bonanza Explorations Inc.
This news release was reviewed by Douglas Wood, P.G., Vice President, Exploration of Bonanza, a non-independent Qualified Person within the meaning of NI 43-101.
About Bonanza
Bonanza is operating the newly constructed Copperstone gold mine in Arizona. For more information please visit Bonanza's website at www.americanbonanza.com.
AMERICAN BONANZA GOLD CORP.
Brian Kirwin, President & Chief Executive Officer
We seek safe harbour.
Contacts:

American Bonanza Gold Corp.

1-877-688-7523

info@americanbonanza.com

www.americanbonanza.com



American Bonanza Gold Corp.

Suite 1238-200 Granville St.,

Vancouver, BC V6C 1S4

Go FFGO!!!
Dividends of 3400%+ are worth waiting for!




Texan77   

Thursday, June 14, 2012 12:06:19 PM

Re: medchal post# 202004

Post # of 202048

insuficient. curent writen docs will reflect what? try that on for size try and lawyer me complete transactional writen docs will reflect what? answer that as if past records are complete if stock" removed" admit removed is a transaction and will show in writen form permineant non ownership as well as close any short position that may be tied to such shares .


What a silly question! Most personal property has no "proof of ownership" attached to it, so the question is frivolous to begin with. If revoked shares are held by a brokerage, the record of ownership is not obliterated by removing the shares from the brokerage's electronic bookkeeping system, and the brokerage will show the ownership, and removal of the shares, on the last statement on which the holding appears. Where's the "proof of ownership" of the shares which are not removed from your brokerage account right now? There is none, other than for the written documents issued by the broker.

Ill be direct since ya want to lawyer talk; removal is equivalent to sale as far as the brokers writen documants are concerned right? If not specify the diferance useing current writen docs because there aint none. Chain of title is broken same problem robo signers have. chain of title is broken ....people dont fall for this proof is losy and judge will not give back. Also the property personal you speak of is in your possesion most ffgo shares never were because of iou ;electronic digit all we have...Im telling yaul no chain of title or ownership will occur if "removed" from account. Dont fall for it.




Texan77   

Thursday, June 14, 2012 12:32:44 PM

Re: medchal post# 202003

Post # of 202048

"ownership interest" in FFGO*yup*like*that*keep*that

tiger by the tail




Texan77   

Thursday, June 14, 2012 12:43:51 PM

Re: medchal post# 202018

Post # of 202048

I can hear it now we have no fiduciary duty to collect a divi for you because you removed your shares from our your account but they are paying a divi and others have recieved them so we have no further fiduciary duty to you whatsoever period lol
DTC we have no record of your ownership in ffgo sorry

broker we do not have your shares they were removed sorry

judge you have no proof of ownership sorry

but sir i have purchase trade orders
sorry when you removed share the ipso facto were abandoned (period)




Texan77   

Thursday, June 14, 2012 12:59:51 PM

Re: medchal post# 202030

Post # of 202048

thats a cop out because truth the truth face it

ipso facto removal is abandonment




tatoo1   

Thursday, June 14, 2012 1:04:03 PM

Re: SevenTenEleven post# 201988

Post # of 202048

I will be hanging on to my shares, along with the other longs here. Just a little irate about the request from TDA.




Texan77   

Thursday, June 14, 2012 1:09:44 PM

Re: None

Post # of 202048

furthermore abandonment would release shorty from delivery of ffgo real shares


The term abandonment has a multitude of uses, legal and extra-legal. This article attempts to provide a guide to the various legal and quasi-legal uses of the word and includes links to articles that deal with each of the distinct concepts at greater length.

Abandonment, in law, is the relinquishment or renunciation of an interest, claim, privilege, possession, or right, especially with the intent of never again resuming or reasserting it. Such intentional action may take the form of a discontinuance or a waiver. This broad meaning has a number of applications in different branches of law. In common law jurisdictions, both common law abandonment and statutory abandonment of property may be recognized. Common law abandonment may be generally defined as "the relinquishment of a right [in property] by the owner thereof without any regard to future possession by himself or any other person, and with the intention to foresake [sic] or desert the right...."[1]

Common law abandonment is "the voluntary relinquishment of a thing by its owner with the intention of terminating his ownership, and without [the intention of] vesting ownership in any other person; the giving up of a thing absolutely, without reference to any particular person or purpose...."[2] An example of statutory abandonment in a common law jurisdiction is abandonment by a bankruptcy trustee under 11 U.S.C. § 554. In Scots law, failure to assert a legal right in a way that implies abandonment of it is called taciturnity.




AlanC

Thursday, June 14, 2012 1:30:06 PM

Re: AlanC post# 202022

Post # of 202048

Some say a picture is worth a thousand words. Work on Copperstone: http://www.americanbonanza.com/i/pdf/CorporatePresentation.pdf
Go FFGO!!!
Dividends of 3400%+ are worth waiting for!




Texan77   

Thursday, June 14, 2012 1:50:26 PM

Re: puppydotcom post# 202036

Post # of 202048

to subtle? lol anyway . they hmmmmm




SevenTenEleven 

Thursday, June 14, 2012 2:00:09 PM

Re: tatoo1 post# 202033

Post # of 202048

Ask TDA to put in writing that if a dividend is paid, you qualify.

Have a feeling TDA is working every angle.

Tic Toc


OldBen 

Thursday, June 14, 2012 2:03:02 PM

Re: AlanC post# 202035

Post # of 202048

Besides the pictures, the numbers are also staggering. If memory serves, then, I think we sold about half of the S. Copperstone for about 65 million. So, if we sell the entire S. Copperstone for 130 million then that might be a reasonable price. Looks like Copperstone will be pulling a lot of gold out of the ground. Those were not "paper" assets that I was looking at in the pics LOL.




Vianna 

Thursday, June 14, 2012 6:18:14 PM

Re: varmit post# 201959

Post # of 202048

Thanks for sharing, varmit! LOL..."poor" E-Trade...

V

varmit Share Wednesday, June 13, 2012 2:31:01 PM
Re: None Post # of 202045

FFGO fresh off the phone w/ e-trade ...

asking me to write off shares to clean out the account and have a tax write off !!!

why its months until tax time ,,,almost a year in fact ,,,

my reply !!! no thanks : i will wait for my .007 -4.60 dividend come record date ....

seems odd to ask me to write off shares anyway......i have several other revolked stocks in my account and they never ask to write them off .....cmkx/ estt/ etc ...

so sumtin is up !!!!! yes indeed ,,, gold is up and keeps going up ......always will.

record date tells all !!!!!! varmy cares




paunch13   

Thursday, June 14, 2012 6:35:03 PM

Re: Vianna post# 202046

Post # of 202048

Vianna
They will try almost anything to try and get out of paying what they owe
John




Texan77   

Thursday, June 14, 2012 1:32:27 PM

Re: AlanC post# 7707

Post # of 7712

con·tig·u·ous to south copperstone

Sharing a common border; touching.
Next or together in sequence.

nmgl preferd b 2.20 face




Texan77   

Thursday, June 14, 2012 1:39:57 PM

Re: AlanC post# 7709

Post # of 7712

south target 12g/ton !



BMFL<OD

next week(s) is here

Who's Next!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BfuWXRZe9yA

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pQBLi5mukmI


Shortmans Anthem!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fRge7lXu56

Fortress Financial Group (fka FFGO)

Moderators:underdog150, SevenTenEleven, Rocket Man, Vianna, TomSawyer, Mike2211

http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/board.aspx?board_id=3111



SevenTenEleven 

Friday, June 15, 2012 8:11:26 AM

Re: varmit post# 202050

Post # of 202097

Looks as if things are wrapping up. A few simple bits of paperwork and shareholders should see their 3449% or more ROI.

Very limited time for shorts to still close out their positions and cover.

TDA working the phone lines very aggressively to influence shareholders to allow them to remove the shares from their accounts.

Are TDA "order takers" qualified to give investment and tax planning advice?

Last time I checked, they were a discount broker.

Not wise for 100% tax losses ahead of 3449% to 4600000% gains!

Tic Toc



Vianna

Friday, June 15, 2012 1:41:25 PM

Re: medchal post# 202079

Post # of 202097

WHAT IS OBVIOUS...

Don't worry...clearly the "obvious fact" IS SHORTY CAN'T DENY...........

FFGO is NOT OVER

...NMGL protected itself from revocation with the Form 15...

and HOPE IS VERY MUCH ALIVE!!!!!!!!

Have a GREAT weekend FFGOrs!

V


Vianna 

Friday, June 15, 2012 2:23:25 PM

Re: alien42 post# 202082

Post # of 202097

the irony is that FFGO is a revoked stock...NO ONE can buy it and there is NO NEED FOR A WARNING to protect "Newbies!"

Right FFGOrs???

V



paunch13   

Friday, June 15, 2012 2:29:26 PM

Re: Vianna post# 202083

Post # of 202097

Vianna'
That is their major problem, shorty can do nothing now but wait like us and the problem with that is we are waiting for pay day and they are waiting to pay back a part of what they have stolen
John




Vianna 

Friday, June 15, 2012 5:00:15 PM

Re: puppydotcom post# 202091

Post # of 202097

Keep saying this and one day you may actually "believe" it...

puppydotcom Member Profile puppydotcom Member Level

Friday, June 15, 2012 4:56:34 PM

Re: alien42 post# 202082

Post # of 202091

yup, and who cares if NMGL goes dark anyway .. NMGL no longer has anything to do with revoked and closed down FFGO

NMGL will not & can not EVER!!! legally ... issue any divvies to revoked FFGO share holders.

No matter how many wild stories and crazy rumors are made up .. nothing will changes this fact

No divvy is coming from NMGL or FFGO to FFGO share holders

FFGO is GONE!!!!




Dhoraji   

Friday, June 15, 2012 6:54:34 PM

Re: puppydotcom post# 202072

Post # of 202097

Yes. Negotiated settlement through Regulators!!!  You know why, because FINRA and SEC are very well aware of NSS problem in FFGO and may be they are
giving ample time to wrongdoing gangs to wake up and do right thing, before it's too late! In the mean time, they are not authorizing dividend distribution, which can involve illegal NSS in FFGO.




AlanC

Friday, June 15, 2012 5:43:55 AM

Re: AlanC post# 7709

Post # of 7715

Got gold? Gold and silver naked short positions being exposed?
London Trader - Staggering 515 Tons of Gold Sold in 4 Hours

With many global investors still rattled by the recent price action in gold and silver, today King World News interviewed the “London Trader” to get his take on these markets. The source told KWN that not only was a shocking amount of paper gold sold in just 4 hours yesterday, but it was also confirmed that the mainstream media is not reporting the staggering amount of physical gold that has actually been purchased by China recently. Here is what the source had to say: “China has purchased hundreds of tons of gold in the last couple of months. China is not disclosing what their true reserves are. Russia is delaying disclosure and so is Iran. We saw record gold imports of over 100 tons through Hong Kong to China in April, as reported by the mainstream media, but what has been reported is just the tip of the iceberg.”

“What we've seen is a dramatic acceleration of physical gold purchases as the price has been drawn down. Staggering amounts of physical gold are being purchased. The acceleration of physical purchases, at these lower levels, is the reason why gold has been holding firm and building such a nice base.

I want to be very clear about this, in addition to what is being reported by the mainstream media, we have seen hundreds of tons of additional physical gold being purchased by China over the last three months....
“What happened yesterday in the gold market was very interesting. One full hour before Bernanke's testimony, the bullion banks started selling. Over the next 4 hours, the bullion banks sold the equivalent of 515 metric tons of paper gold. This was in just 4 hours, and again, the selling started one hour before Bernanke’s testimony.

The selling went on for another 3 hours after the Fed Chairman began to speak, and as I said, over 515 metric tons of paper gold was sold. During this entire takedown, there was zero physical gold available for sale in the market. However, this action did create tremendous supply for the Eastern buyers to lock in the spot price of gold. This will patiently be converted to physical in the coming weeks.

The real question here is, how could an entity begin selling such a massive amount of paper gold when there hadn’t been any news (starting to sell before Bernanke's testimony)?

During this coordinated attack on gold, hedge funds and managed money were being forced out of their paper positions. A large wave of selling entered the paper gold market and traders saw the price of gold drop $40 in a matter of minutes. So the action was orchestrated by the Fed, and Fed-speak was used to assist in the takedown.

On the opposite side, the rise we saw last Friday was not a natural rise, it was a squeeze of the hedge fund shorts. After squeezing the hedge fund shorts on Friday and actually getting them to take on some long side exposure because gold took out key resistance levels, they then dropped the gold market like a stone yesterday. So the commercials are ringing the register at both ends of the tape. But in reality, what the bullion banks are trying to do is to get out of some of the massive naked short positions that are on the books.

During all of the chaos of the last couple of months, the Eastern hemisphere has been vacuuming physical metal out of the market. However, supply is very tight out there. As I mentioned earlier, no physical gold was for sale yesterday during the takedown, just paper gold. Gold actually went into backwardation, and silver has actually been in backwardation for weeks. For immediate delivery of gold, in size, we are seeing delays, but silver is extraordinarily backlogged.

Also, there was an absolutely staggering amount of silver that was purchased by an Eastern buyer three weeks ago near the $27 level. This order was breathtaking in terms of the size. It is currently queued up at two refiners, but has been backlogged for the last three weeks and running. In other words, we are looking at serious backlogs for physical silver.

So as I said earlier, the bullion banks are ringing the register at both ends, while trying to extricate themselves from their short positions in the paper market. They are attempting to do this before transparency comes in to the market. They do not want a situation where the aggressive hedge funds actually get evidence that these bullion banks are naked short.

They are concerned that if it is discovered they are naked short gold and silver, those hedge funds will aggressively target those banks. This is what happened to JP Morgan, recently, when the London Whale got caught. As soon as Jamie Dimon was forced to admit a $2 billion loss, the sharks realized they were vulnerable and came in to attack. That has greatly magnified the size JP Morgan’s loss. The last thing powerful entities want to see is for this to occur in the gold and silver markets.”
.

The interviews with MEP Nigel Farage and Michael Pento are available now. Also, be sure to listen to this week’s line-up of other KWN interviews which include Dr. Stephen Leeb, Don Coxe ($538 billion BMO), Art Cashin ($612 billion UBS), Rob Arnott (oversees $100 billion), Newmont CEO Richard O’Brien, John Hathaway and James Turk by CLICKING HERE.

Eric King
KingWorldNews.com
Go NMGL!!!


BMFL<OD

next week(s) is here

Who's Next!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BfuWXRZe9yA

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pQBLi5mukmI


Shortmans Anthem!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fRge7lXu56

Cotton & Western Mining (CWRN)

Moderators:lucky,mydog, SevenTenEleven, Rocket Man, microcaps1, tlc2, 2H2O

investorshub.advfn.com/Cotton-&-Western-Mining-CWRN-5865/


---------------------------------


2H2O

Friday, June 15, 2012 8:32:00 AM
Re: None            
Post # 74510

Day 11 since indictment

Will Bob speak to shareholders today? How long will this continue? What a total disregard for shareholders this CEO has.

---------------------------------

lucky,mydog

Friday, June 15, 2012 8:35:10 AM
Re: 2H2O post# 74510        
Post # 74594

i wonder when the justice department will issue an arrest warrant for bribery bob?

---------------------------------

SevenTenEleven

Friday, June 15, 2012 8:43:21 AM
Re: lucky,mydog post# 74511        
Post # 74512

Is there a compromised agent at the SEC office in Miami?

Why was the CWRN case not brought up by the Fort Worth Texas SEC office?

Is the SEC tainting this case, in some way, by allowing a "rogue agent" releasing non-public information, prior to SEC filings?

It is already believed that the Boston office is may be "out-sourcing" the writing of their complaints to third party journalists. Is this possible?

......Quote:i wonder when the justice department will issue an arrest warrant for bribery bob?


Tic Toc

---------------------------------

2H2O

Friday, June 15, 2012 8:44:41 AM
Re: MaxShockeR post# 74488
Post # 74513

I just filed an SEC complaint. Thanks for the link. I hope others do as well. This company is worth nothing while Bob Cotton continues his games.


---------------------------------

2H2O Member

Friday, June 15, 2012 8:46:10 AM
Re: SevenTenEleven post# 74512        
Post # 74514

Yes, it's a big conspiracy. An SEC agent is willing to risk it all for a sub penny stock. LOL all the way to the bank!

---------------------------------

lucky,mydog

Friday, June 15, 2012 8:47:32 AM
Re: SevenTenEleven post# 74512        
Post # 74515

the insinuation that the fbi or sec are somehow acting improperly in this matter is funny. knowing the history of enforcement actions and indictments would give you a clearer picture.

---------------------------------

2H2O

Friday, June 15, 2012 9:37:09 AM
Re: microcaps1 post# 74522
Post # 74523

Does it matter now? CWRN has got a CE to stay now that the DOJ and SEC are involved with the bribery scandal.

    Quote:they specifically told me there was no evidence of fraud


---------------------------------

joev2

Friday, June 15, 2012 9:46:53 AM
Re: microcaps1 post# 74522            
Post # 74525

I disagree. Once the charges were brought, that constituted a "known investigation of fraudulent activity involving (an) insider..."

Where am I misconstruing things? It didn't say that he was found guilty....just that there is a known investigation. Being that one of the charges against Cotton is clearly fraud and it's been made public (just look at the dockets), I think I'm correct i.e. this would or could cause a CE label.

---------------------------------

microcaps1

Friday, June 15, 2012 10:05:22 AM
Re: joev2 post# 74525        
Post # 74528

There is no known investigation re an insider-the allegation in the complaints concerns an alleged March 2010 promotion.

---------------------------------

joev2      
   
Friday, June 15, 2012 10:18:50 AM
Re: microcaps1 post# 74528        
Post # 74531

"From February through March 2010, Defendants Robert L. Cotton and
Cotton & Western Mining, Inc. engaged in a fraudulent market manipulation scheme involving Cotton & Western's stock."

We apparently have different views of what fraud is. Cotton has been clearly charged with attempting to manipulate Cwrn's stock. Stocks ARE securities.

Again: Investigation of Fraud — There is a known investigation of fraudulent activity involving the company, its securities or insiders.

---------------------------------

microcaps1

Friday, June 15, 2012 10:38:41 AM
Re: joev2 post# 74531        
Post # 74534

No you said there was an investigation of insiders-there is no investigation of insiders nor mention of insiders in the complaints.

You said that otc applied ce because of fraud-when otc specifically told me there was no evidence of fraud- the ce has nothing to do w the alleged March 2010 promotion.

---------------------------------

joev2

Friday, June 15, 2012 10:58:09 AM
Re: microcaps1 post# 74534        
Post # 74539

The CE was applied way back when. I said the CE could or would NOW be applied for the reason I stated. I stand by what I said. There's no need to keep bringing up the original reason as to why they slapped the company with CE. If everything was fine and dandy, the investigation of Bob and subsequent complaint filed by the SEC would be cause enough to NOW give Cwrn a CE rating. You don't think so?????

Investigation of Fraud — There is a known investigation of fraudulent activity involving the company, its securities or insiders.

Are you saying Bob is NOT being investigated for fraud? The SEC is charging both him and the company with exactly that! "Fraudulent scheme" are the plaintiff's words, not mine.

Stop nitpicking. Both the company and Bob are part of the investigation that caused the complaint to be filed. And what does it involve? Ans. Fraudulent activity involving....its securities (stocks).

Seems to me one of the reasons for the CE rating i.e. Investigation of Fraud, nails all 3....the company (Cwrn) which is defending in the complaint; Cotton (an insider), who also is a defendant; and finally the stock itself ("its securities") as being the area manipulated.

Some don't want to see, but it's right there in the open.


---------------------------------

microcaps1

Friday, June 15, 2012 11:03:40 AM
Re: microcaps1 post# 74537
Post # 74540

Probable 11 million plus net income-order 5 of 20k tons reported sold weeks ago on the ihub by somebody else-based on thousands of hours dd rather than baseless satirical comments-Does this sound like a development stage company

Kriton 38524/ton left Apr 2nd 2011-price was unknown but was reportedly more than the 155 somebody posted at the time-spot was 175-192 during that time-both 58% and 62% ore (hadn't reportedly acquired previous 68 drill hole reports yet which led to Coloso vein from whence Loreto ore and all subsequent ore came except for substantial 1-3mm already in inventory) millions of cash contributions from investors were paid off from just 30% of the income from this ship alone

Loreto left Aug 8 w 36002 tons- ca 170/ton spot- 1st order to come from the higher quality veins see Aug 8 PR (not on marketwire)

the 3rd ship has now left with about 43800 tons,just as forecast by the Nov 17 PR,which said the next ship would be 40-45k tons. Somebody else discovered the ship-its called dd -and then we tracked the ship via various public ship tracking sites-its again called dd.

shipments 3 and 4 (ca 60 k tons total) paid for in Dec -thus all the millions in new equipment--1 independent source says for 140/ton-about right- spot was ca 140 then (now ca 148 last I knew) plus premium ore

so 134526 tons sold in 2011 for ca 155/ton average or more
-some juniors have negative cost due to premium ore (5/ton for every % over 62%) see Cohibaman's article in Max's dd summary so avg jr miner cost is ca 25/ton plus shipping and trucking (trucking was 9.24/ton for Loreto) 1st 2 loads shipping were ca 30/ton but a Panamax shouldnt be more than 15/ton?as per my extensive calculations posted on other board back in October

so cost of ca 65/ton or less and profit of 90/ton but to be safe I only estimated 75/ton profit times 134526 tons is $10,089,000 net income plus 5th order of ca 1.25 million profit (trying to be conservative) so total profit to date ca 11.25 million

start up costs probably raise costs and are unknown but going forward costs will fall and ancillary income streams of sub 1mm iron chips, fertilizer will kick in-eventually even Al203- CWRN already has cement revenue stream.

part of orders 3,4 and 5 was just shipped on the Qin Hai-DWT of ca 45600 tons minus ballast ,water and people is ca 43800 tons shipped-(Nov 17 PR forecast ca 40-45k tons) now on a possible round circuit from China to save on shipping-and order 5 started trucking mid March or earlier-

-independent pics as well as CWRN pics showed order 5 trucking at port ca Mar 19-depending on size of order 5 that would be more than the max size of a Panamax-(orders 3 and 4 reportedly total 60k tons) which are rated at 60-80k/ton but cant carry more than ca 75k because have to leave room for people,fuel and ballast

fertilizer as is without any further processing brings a min of 90/ton as verified by independent sites but posted by Rocket email re possible JV plant onsite w OMRI to process fertilizer would result in 325-550/ton (550 for pelleted)

the cheap 1.73% azomite fertilizer offered elsewhere is going for 325-550 I think and CWRN'S fert is 55.55% iron (posted SGS analysis)-will have to be diluted or cut (as the druggies say) many times-so thats good-

150k tons 1-3mm in inventory ? plus as posted ca 200k tons 0-1mm in inventory,which is now being processed or has been processed for separation into sub 1mm iron chips to be pelleted and fertilizer.

--------------------------------

Phillyfan

Friday, June 15, 2012 11:05:37 AM
Re: SevenTenEleven post# 74512        
Post # 74541

If everyone can remember correctly, when the original fake buyout offer for .15 cents in 2010 was placed out of Florida. As per below:

(PINKSHEETS: CWRN) A buyout tender of $0.15 cents for all issued and outstanding common shares of Cotton & Western Mining, Inc. was recently rejected by the Board of Directors; however, the Majority Shareholders, Robert L. Cotton & Sharon Vazquez have decided that the offer from Freedom Network should be disclosed to our shareholders as further thoughts on the matter are being evaluated and considered. As a shareholder of Cotton & Western Mining, Inc., each one should have the options available on an individual basis; therefore, we are providing the following information for your consideration:

OFFERING PARTY: FREEDOM NETWORK ADDRESS: 2002 N. LOIS AVE, TAMPA, FLORIDA U.S.A. 33607 PHONE:1 800 590 4523 CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER: MR. MICHAEL JACOBS ELECTRONIC MAIL: help.at.freedomnetworkinvestments.com WEB PAGE: www.freedomnetworkinvestments.com The following letter from Mr. Jacobs is herein under paraphrased:

Read more: _thestockmarketwatch.com/newsletters/2011/03/02/wednesdays-report-15/#ixzz1xsEFy8bi

Coincidence that the charges are brought out from a Florida SEC office; I think not; since, this was blatantly a false offer from a Florida based company; makes you say HMMMMM???. Connect the dots and you will find out why these were brought out from a Florida SEC office and not a Texas one.

We have real mine that is producing; what Bob did with his past desperate transgression; he will plea bargain for sure. My hopes are for a changing of the guard in some shape or form or push for immediate transparency to help his(Bob's) case with his charges; when your back is against the wall(Bob) and you only can do things on the straight & narrow in the best interest of the company & it's shareholders; and no longer in his own best interests makes me feel better about CWRN than I have being left in the dark the past 8 months.

Shareholders have Big brother watching Bob moves...explains why there is a NDA the past several months as well doesn't it....HMMMM???

GLTA...GO CWRN!!!

---------------------------------

microcaps1

Friday, June 15, 2012 11:18:54 AM
Re: microcaps1 post# 74540    
Post # 74543

At this pps companies rarely have any revenue, let alone any net income--CWRN has probably had 11.25 million net income-which I have backed up w a lot of info-its called dd-compiling info from publicly available sources-simply posting satirical questions without proof doesnt change the publicly available facts.

Somebody posted weeks back that order 5 of ca 20k tons had been paid for-so net income now probably 11.25 million-being conservative. And ca 43800 tons of port ore shipped in last 2 days.

I've seen stocks as high as 50 dollars plus pps w large NEGATIVE income. The Penny world-like quantum physics -is strange-their pps (as low as it is) is usually astronomical compared to income- w equivalent PE's -based on future SPECULATIVE income of 20-1000 plus.

How do u figure the ratio when the income is negative-I've seen pennies as high as 1 dollar/share w book value as low as a negative 15 dollars-meaning each share is worth negative 15 dollars in real world "assets" otherwise known as liabilities.

We never saw any financial statements like this when I was ,inter alia, getting my accounting degree. When my friends finally dragged me into pennies and I began reading thousands of penny financial statements I was shocked- it seemed like 99% of low priced pennies were bankrupt. One company had 50 million in debt and only 5k in assets and had uplisted to OTCQB-how?

Cf that to CWRN- which, including inventory-could have a net assets/stockholders equity as high as who knows-the 200k tons of trommel processed product alone could bring 22 million as is to over 50 million if the fertilizer is processed via an onsite plant.

200k tons by 35-40% iron chips is average 75k tons at wild guess of 110/ton as part of 180-200/ton pellet feedstock is 8.25 million plus 100-37.5 minus ca 15% waste is 48% fertilizer-as is at 90/ton is 96k tons is 8,640,000 for a total of ca 17 million

-but if fertilizer is processed as per an onsite processing plant they could get ca 325-550/ton-which would be 31.2 million to 52.8 million less cost of such plant amortized

4.361 B shares O/S divided into the guess of 11.25 million net income (see previous post) is .00257968355 net income/share.

So at a PE of 15 that would be a pps of 3.869525325 cents and this does not include the income from cement etc byproducts

This of course increases w each sale in the high profit industry and this ignores the income from other extra sources like the cement trucked to the Ensenada plant

A pps of .0025 yields a market cap of 11 million-which is far less than the inventory is worth!

this alone proves the incredible amount of manipulation experienced in pinkie land which is 1 of the reasons they've been working on uplisting to at least the OTCBB

at a PE of 15 pps of 3.869c divided by current pps of .0027 is only 1/14.329 of what pps should be and thus assumes an income of only 11.25 million dollars divided by 14.329 or 785,000 net income!!!!!!!!

Public spot and jr miner costs are public knowledge and posted many times.

and ignores future income (and cement byproduct income)-which should be several times greater -as we have seen from huge mine expansion and millions in additional equipment plus coming extra income streams

Note CWRN pps had risen as high as 3.1c before first ship -before any revenue=and is now only 1/11.48 of that pps-at .0027.

(pesky numbers keep changing)

When you finally find a rare penny co breakthrough like CWRN and yet pps falls like this-before the latest fall -its a twilight zone world-and answer is to file current financials and uplist to escape this bizarre world/manipulation-unless big investors realize how undervalued this is.

the iron ore business is known for its current high profit margin-as I said spot is public knowledge and so is average jr miners cost-so most jr miners have a profit margin exceeding 50%-many greatly exceeding 50%. Some have negative cost due to premium ore -even without CWRN's coming and present extra income streams

Remember these pennies probably have a SPECULATIVE FUTURE income equivalent average PE of ca 50-then once co's have net income the parallel universe of penny traders punishes them-I have yet to understand the logic-especially when most of these low priced pennies never achieve net income and fail.

There are many reasons which we are aware of-games by otc/dtc/mm/brokers/shorters/restrictions by brokers- they say because pps is below 1c and no current posted financials.

Without current posted financials many brokers restrict buying as part of a new effort starting in 2011 to eliminate low priced pennies and many potential buyers have been standing on the sidelines waiting for posted financials before buying- and the improperly imposed by non regulatory for profit otc classification (based on shorters shout fire of a promotion which never occurred) is also a large drag.
So we await the promised uplisting w its audited financials

The point of all this is this is the most undervalued company for the pps,which nobody has been able to successfully challenge. Unlike most companies at this pps this is a real company.

---------------------------------

microcaps1

Friday, June 15, 2012 11:21:27 AM
Re: microcaps1 post# 74543        
Post # 74544

NET INCOME IS PROFIT. The public spot price has ranged from 120 to 191.90/ton ever since 2011.

150/ton is China's internal cost for production (agmetalminer.com 12-13-10) since their ore averages less than 20% (recent pbs? documentary-as low as 4%-ibid) -often in underground mines-so agmetalminer said 150/ton should be the near term floor for spot-absent speculators games-

why would internal mines even keep producing over long term if China could get ore more cheaply on the international market?

Jr miners average production costs are usually under 25/ton so add shipping and trucking (ca 9/ton but probably falling -from May 2011 PR when oil was higher and had 1st trucking contract)of say 29/ton leaves cost of ca 54/ton -average spot since 2011 of ca 155 so that would leave a profit of 100/ton.

But to be very conservative because I dont know what other startup costs might have been I've been estimating much less profit.

Ore was only 10-14/ton til 2002 so u can see why profit margin is huge.
CWRN profit est at 11.25 million based on my dd and publicly avail info in PR's etc

---------------------------------

SevenTenEleven

Friday, June 15, 2012 11:46:00 AM
Re: Phillyfan post# 74541        
Post # 74547

Looks like shorters may have taken full advantage of that PR.

---------------------------------

2H2O

Friday, June 15, 2012 12:06:39 PM
Re: SevenTenEleven post# 74547        
Post # 74549

Like the PR that said there would be 300 mill in Q1 of 2011? That kooky conspiracy again! Poor Bob never did anything but help - HIMSELF.

....Quote:Looks like shorters may have taken full advantage of that PR.

---------------------------------

wcthrill

Friday, June 15, 2012 12:06:47 PM
Re: mbertr12 post# 74546
Post # 74550

buy now..cause it will goto .00010.Ive heard this same thing last it would go back to .03

---------------------------------

2H2O

Friday, June 15, 2012 12:38:57 PM
Re: None            
Post # 74552

Where are the pictures and emails from Bob now? Haven't seen any posted in 11 days. Strange.

---------------------------------

Rocket Man

Friday, June 15, 2012 12:58:10 PM
Re: 2H2O post# 74552        
Post # 74554

Eleven days? Good one.. 3 tops.. lol Go CWRN! Produce and ship some more ore CWRN... Yup, the mine works on Fridays! 10k mt of OMRI can be produced in 1 day. Count em 10,000 mt, in one day. Multiply with a calculator to make sure of accuracy.. Plug in 10,000.00 x $350.00mt and see what the number is.. Then take it out to 312 x that for the year.. This may get confusing but it is for 6 days a week and 52 weeks in a year.. Just sayin.. 11 days since no photos.. sheesh

_investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=76529005

---------------------------------

dhjr123

Friday, June 15, 2012 1:04:14 PM
Re: 2H2O post# 74552        
Post # 74594

Bob can't take pictures right none of the other co. have bought any new equipment lately.

---------------------------------

2H2O

Friday, June 15, 2012 1:35:34 PM
Re: Rocket Man post# 74554        
Post # 74557

My mistake ! In that case though - can you tell me why there are now pictures allowed at the port again? Thought they weren't allowed during the period when everyone said so many shipments were going out. Weird that the non-PR'ed ghost shipments weren't allowed to have pictures at the port, but now pictures at the port are here again!

Oh, and who said this was a CWRN shipment? PR a while back said someone bought the ore at the port. You've got a 50/50 chance that this is what you are seeing. Not that it matters. Till old bobby clears things up (include the charges against him now too), nothing changes.

---------------------------------

General Grievous

Friday, June 15, 2012 1:58:33 PM
Re: 2H2O post# 74557        
Post # 74559

Dont you know? ANY ship leaving the port is full of cwrn ore! lol...and any ship on its way there is picking up some of that grade a iron for bao steel! LOL!

---------------------------------

MaxShockeR

Friday, June 15, 2012 3:35:02 PM
Re: joev2 post# 74539        
Post # 74562

OMG..the CE was applied in Jan 2011, so stating the CE was applied because of the investigations is totally bogus.

> Showing the SEC/FBI investigation is during the period of Feb/March 2010 the CE is not connected at all with this case.

>> Jun 04 2012 "SEC Charges Company Officers & PennyStock Promoters in Kickback and Market Manipulation Schemes"
_www.sec.gov/news/press/2012/2012-108.htm

Docket 1 (June 1 2012) PDF file viewer.zoho.com/docs/oabcaWc CASE #: 0:12-cr-60126-WPD

Docket 2 (June 4 2012) PDF file viewer.zoho.com/docs/zcW5bj CASE #: 0:12-cv-61072-WJZ (was removed but now added again)

Heres some posts regarding the CE issue and again it's NOT RELATED with the litigation, since the TimeFrame is way off by almost a Year, OK approx 9 months

-Jan 31 2011 Management Addresses CE Issue
_ih.advfn.com/p.php?pid=nmona&article=46228667

-C.E. DTC Issues:
_investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=66932681

-Monthly DTC fees not payed?
_investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=66935982

-Tactics by special groups
_investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=60121999

-OTC's list of possible reasons out of context and only quoted the 1 possible reason as if it were fact-that is fraudulent.
_investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=76644690

-Wyoming's Email to Bob about the CE & Uplisting subject (May 2011)
_investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=63087863


GLTA

$CWRN

---------------------------------

Rocket Man

Friday, June 15, 2012 3:43:42 PM
Re: 2H2O post# 74557        
Post # 74563

To be straight up. I was told that the Port Authority frowned on photos, eos. The fact that we get them is not my concern. I am not not sure why the harping about the photos, if they are not supposed to be taken call the Mexican Authorities for sake and show them these. Might mention that your new partner in IRON ore shipping just last time it was PR was around $320,000.00 for fees and see what they say.. Like sure no problem Sir, would you like me to snap a few more of you at the pier.. lol Mean while enjoy them while we can folks... Hope that works out for everyone.

AS for a 50/50 chance the we didn't ship ore? lmao Your not serious I hope? lol

images.investorshub.advfn.com/images/uploads/2012/6/10/smpieDSC06781.jpg
images.investorshub.advfn.com/images/uploads/2012/6/10/mhbqvDSC06780.jpg

---------------------------------

joev2

Friday, June 15, 2012 3:59:33 PM
Re: MaxShockeR post# 74562        
Post # 74565

Can't any of you read???? I never said that. I said that the investigation of FRAUD is enough to put a CE rating on the stock. So, quit arguing about how unjust the first one was. If it wasn't slapped on (unjustly as some claim), undoubtedly the CE rating WOULD be slapped on NOW and not without cause!

I don't have to call Cotton a fraud. The SEC is doing it for me....

---------------------------------

MaxShockeR

Friday, June 15, 2012 4:07:29 PM
Re: joev2
post# 74566

No we can't read but we do know what a License Plate is and what state they are issued in.. LOL

yup that's a "Baja commercial License plate they do start with 2 letters" not British Columbia ..*sigh*

plateshack.com/y2k/Mexico2/bajacal.jpg

---------------------------------

MaxShockeR

Friday, June 15, 2012 4:12:07 PM
Re: Rocket Man post# 74563        
Post # 74567

OMG...SKULL AND CROSSBONES FOR CWRN ... *sigh*

like we did'nt already know that .. LMAO !!!!!!

_www.otcmarkets.com/stock/CWRN/company-info

(WE) I CAN SEE CLEARLY NOW

---------------------------------

joev2

Friday, June 15, 2012 4:13:43 PM
Re: MaxShockeR post# 74566        
Post # 74568

Maybe you should address that to the person that brought it up, huh?

---------------------------------

MaxShockeR

Friday, June 15, 2012 4:14:39 PM
Re: None            
Post # 74569

News April 13 2012 .at. 8:30AM Wide Area Deep Drilling Underway

    Quote:Cotton & Western Mining, Inc. CWRN , Panamerican Minerals Ventures, S.A. de C.V. Mexico, the operators of the "Guadalupe Iron Mineral Concession," drilled three deep conformation holes 300 meters apart in the center line of the 1,500 meter long Coloso Iron Mineral Vein, (one of four major iron mineral veins located on the concession); the purpose of those drill-holes was to explore the depth of the Coloso Vein, since the original drill program of 68 holes was shallow at 20-meters depth. Drill-hole 69 at 44-meters revealed continuous iron minerals mixed Magnetite and Hematite down to an elevation point of 81-meters above sea level, where the drilling was suspended without punching through the iron minerals as the iron content became lower and the mineral became solid magnetite. Drill-hole 70 at 84-meters depth on the lower elevation of the concession revealed the same mineral structure as drill-hole 69, hitting iron mineral at 4-meters down and continuous to 84-meters where the drilling was suspended at 2-meters above sea level; the third Drill-hole number 71 at 54-meters depth revealed continuous magnetite as well, the drilling was suspended pending simulated concentration testing of the lower grade materials to better understand the percentage of Fe304 (Magnetite Iron Oxide) uplift that could be anticipated if the materials were processed through a series of beneficiations. Results from those analytical studies indicated that the iron minerals can be processed to a Grade-A iron mineral status. Management has been discussing the feasibility of building a concentration plant on site with the corporation of Bao Steel Group of China, provided that there is enough magnetite mineral reserve to justify the investment; therefore, the company has begun a series of new and deeper drilled-holes on a wide-area bases to establish parameters for an accurate calculation of available mineral reserves. The company is continuously mining the near-surface iron minerals which require dry magnetic separation to achieve the clients specifications.

    Other noteworthy news: the Company has contracted PowerScreen of California to build a heavy-duty 8ft x 30ft x 0.05mm cylindrical Trommel screening plant capable of screening out the small iron chips accumulated since the project went into production in November 2010. This equipment should be on-site and ready to begin processing a shipload of sinter fines within the next couple weeks. The balance of iron minerals less than 0.05mm in size shall be sold into the organic mineral fertilizer industry.

    CWRN Current Share Structure: The Company has stated that it is not currently providing any Market Awareness nor is it involved with the market in any way. The share price of the Company's stock is solely dictated by the market further to that the share structure has not changed since year 2010, nor does the company intend to participate in any trade programs designed to offer company share
    -A/S: 6 Bil -Current O/S: 4,361,635,980 Bil -Restricted: 2,056,610,879 Bil -Free Trading Float: 2,305,025,101 Bil

---------------------------------

MaxShockeR

Friday, June 15, 2012 4:17:55 PM
Re: SevenTenEleven post# 74547        
Post # 74570

"MAPS" & AERIAL MINE PICS of CWRN - PanAm mining concessions

investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=76434351

$CWRN
---------------------------------

MaxShockeR

Friday, June 15, 2012 4:23:28 PM
Re: Rocket Man post# 73776            
Post # 74572

NO 600% is not good profits .. LOL no wonder theres so much interest in making the pps drop ... *sigh*

let's all do the TWIST .... i can twist words but i think i'll use a SHAMWOW in case someone spills their drinks

---------------------------------

MaxShockeR

Friday, June 15, 2012 4:25:19 PM
Re: 2H2O post# 74513        
Post #  74573

Well GJ... im sure it's not for the same purpose's tho that we filed a complaint but still good for the sake of CWRN shareholders

PEACE

----------------------------------

MaxShockeR   

Friday, June 15, 2012 4:29:08 PM
Re: lucky,mydog post# 73872            
Post # 74574

CWRN and SEC/FBI Charges INFO

>> Jun 04 2012 SEC Charges Company Officers & PennyStock Promoters in Kickback and Market Manipulation Schemes
_www.sec.gov/news/press/2012/2012-108.htm

>> Jun 04 2012 SEC Litigation Release # LR-22389
_www.sec.gov/litigation/litreleases/2012/lr22389.htm

-Docket 1 (June 1 2012) PDF file https://viewer.zoho.com/docs/oabcaWc CASE #: 0:12-cr-60126-WPD

-Docket 2 (June 4 2012) PDF file https://viewer.zoho.com/docs/zcW5bj CASE #: 0:12-cv-61072-WJZ

or https://ecf.flsd.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/iquery.pl

Gotta put the info handy

----------------------------------

MaxShockeR

Friday, June 15, 2012 4:38:08 PM
Re: janice shell post# 73361            
Post # 7 4594

i also added the SEC/DOJ Charges INFO in my Sticky post with all the other DD that's included.

i even just added and posted the docket of June 4th since it got removed ... hmmm weird

so no info is beeing hidden.

----------------------------------

MaxShockeR

Friday, June 15, 2012 4:40:06 PM
Re: SevenTenEleven post# 74547        
Post # of 74576

In America, a person is presumed "innocent until proved guilty" not the other way around, "guilty until proven innocent" am i right ?

oh wait it's true some have Court experience here .. lol

Go $CWRN let the Viper "Sting" begin

---------------------------------

SevenTenEleven

Friday, June 15, 2012 5:19:50 PM
Re: None            
Post # 74577

CWRN - Short Volume for June 15th - 20%

20120615|CWRN|548423|0|2677815|O

---------------------------------

Rocket Man

Friday, June 15, 2012 6:08:53 PM
Re: MaxShockeR post# 74572            
Post # 74578

Conveniently suggesting that it is to expensive to short stocks for the average retailer in the USA while not mentioning it is done offshore circumventing the red tape so to speak. 600% was just down to $.0006 look at the profits if it were to have dropped to $.0001 or even $.00001 that we retailers rarely get filled at when it happens.. (I have been filled .at. $.00001s only a couple times on another stock.. Thanks to TDa..)

---------------------------------

janice shell

Friday, June 15, 2012 7:34:03 PM
Re: SevenTenEleven post# 74512        
Post #  74579

Why was the CWRN case not brought up by the Fort Worth Texas SEC office?

Because the alleged offense occurred in Florida. Seems pretty obvious to me, but clearly some would prefer much more complicated "explanations".

Do you understand that where an investigation is conducted is the SEC's call?

Is the SEC tainting this case, in some way, by allowing a "rogue agent" releasing non-public information, prior to SEC filings?

And just what "non-public information" would that be?

---------------------------------

janice shell

Friday, June 15, 2012 7:36:13 PM
Re: SevenTenEleven post# 74516            
Post # 74580

Billions of dollars made, collectively, on naked short selling and market manipulation of sub-penny OTC stocks, just like CWRN.

According to what reputable authority?

---------------------------------

janice shell

Friday, June 15, 2012 7:37:52 PM
Re: 2H2O post# 74519            
Post # 74581

hahahaha. just can't accept that God Cotton could be a crook...much easier to say its' an SEC or FBI person/ whole department??

What's funniest is that he'd evidently prefer that the notoriously problematic Fort Worth office conduct the investigation.

---------------------------------

janice shell

Friday, June 15, 2012 7:48:24 PM
Re: SevenTenEleven post# 74547        
Post #  74582

Looks like shorters may have taken full advantage of that PR.

Are you saying it was okay for Cotton to issue a PR reporting fabricated facts?


---------------------------------

scion    
       
Friday, June 15, 2012 7:58:47 PM
Re: lucky,mydog post# 73872            
Post # 74583

Pacer update 15 Jun 12 - USA v. Cotton CRIMINAL DOCKET FOR CASE #: 0:12-cr-60126-WPD-1

https://ecf.flsd.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/iquery.pl

Date Filed # Docket Text
06/15/2012 11 NOTICE OF TRIAL as to Robert Cotton Calendar Call set for 7/19/2012 09:00 AM in Fort Lauderdale Division before Judge William P. Dimitrouleas. Jury Trial set for 7/23/2012 09:00 AM in Fort Lauderdale Division before Judge William P. Dimitrouleas. (kc) (Entered: 06/15/2012)

06/14/2012 10 ARRAIGNMENT INFORMATION SHEET Not Guilty Plea entered as to counts Robert Cotton (1) Count 1. Court accepts plea. Arraignment held on 6/14/2012 before Magistrate Judge Lurana S. Snow. (at) (Entered: 06/14/2012)

06/14/2012 9 Minute Entry for proceedings held before Magistrate Judge Lurana S. Snow: Initial Appearance as to Robert Cotton held on 6/14/2012, Arraignment as to Robert Cotton (1) Count 1 held on 6/14/2012. (Digital 09:39:43.) (rby) (Entered: 06/14/2012)

06/14/2012 8 WAIVER OF INDICTMENT by Robert Cotton (rby) (Entered: 06/14/2012)

06/14/2012 7 Order on Initial Appearance as to Robert Cotton for proceeding held on 6/14/2012. Signed by Magistrate Judge Lurana S. Snow on 6/14/2012. (rby) (Entered: 06/14/2012)

06/14/2012 6 ORDER RE: SPEEDY TRIAL, PRETRIAL MATTERS as to Robert Cotton. Signed by Magistrate Judge Lurana S. Snow on 6/14/2012. (rby) (Entered: 06/14/2012)

06/14/2012 5 STANDING DISCOVERY ORDER as to Robert Cotton. All motions concerning matters not covered by this order must be filed within 28 days of this order. Signed by Magistrate Judge Lurana S. Snow on 6/14/2012. (rby) (Entered: 06/14/2012)

06/14/2012 4 $150,000 PSB Bond Entered as to Robert Cotton Approved by Magistrate Judge Lurana S. Snow Special Conditions: b. Report to Pretrial Services as directed;p. May travel to and from location and must notify Pretrial Services of travel plans before leaving and upon return.; (rby) (Entered: 06/14/2012)

06/14/2012 3 NOTICE OF ATTORNEY APPEARANCE: David Michael Garvin appearing for Robert Cotton (rby) (Entered: 06/14/2012)

06/14/2012 2 Report Commencing Criminal Action as to Robert Cotton - YOB: **/**/1950 Prisoner #: 00139-104 (rby) (Entered: 06/14/2012)

06/14/2012 Arrest of Robert Cotton (rby) (Entered: 06/14/2012)

06/13/2012 Set/Reset Deadlines/Hearings as to Robert Cotton: Initial Appearance set for 6/14/2012 09:30 AM in Fort Lauderdale Division before FTL Duty Magistrate (LSS). (at) (Entered: 06/13/2012)


U.S. District Court
Southern District of Florida (Ft. Lauderdale)
CRIMINAL DOCKET FOR CASE #: 0:12-cr-60126-WPD-1
Case title: USA v. Cotton
Date Filed: 06/01/2012
Assigned to: Judge William P. Dimitrouleas

Defendant (1)
Robert Cotton
Prisoner ID: 00139-104
YOB: 1950 English

represented by David Michael Garvin
David M Garvin PA
200 S Biscayne Boulevard
Suite 3150
Miami, FL 33131
305-371-8101
Fax: 305-371-8848
Email: dgarvinatdavidmgarvin.com
LEAD ATTORNEY
ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Designation: Retained

Pending Counts
Disposition
MANIPULATIVE AND DECEPTIVE DEVICES15:78J.F
(1)

Highest Offense Level (Opening)
Felony


Plaintiff
USA
represented by H. Ron Davidson
United States Attorney's Office
99 NE 4 Street
Miami, FL 33132
305-961-9405
Fax: 305-536-4699
Email: h.ron.davidsonatusdoj.gov
LEAD ATTORNEY
ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

https://ecf.flsd.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/iquery.pl

---------------------------------

lucky,mydog

Friday, June 15, 2012 8:04:00 PM
Re: scion post# 74583        
Post # 74584

am i reading correctly? he surrendered himself?

---------------------------------

janice shell

Friday, June 15, 2012 8:07:46 PM
Re: scion post# 74583        
Post # 74586

Very interesting. So Cotton appeared yesterday, was arraigned, and pled not guilty.

They certainly did set a very speedy trial. I wonder if Cotton will ask to have it moved forward. $150,000 bond paid. That's kind of steep. One of the other defendants paid $50K.

---------------------------------

janice

Friday, June 15, 2012 8:13:01 PM
Re: Rocket Man post# 74578        
Post #  74587

Conveniently suggesting that it is to expensive to short stocks for the average retailer in the USA while not mentioning it is done offshore circumventing the red tape so to speak.

How? The trades STILL have to go through a U.S. MM

---------------------------------

scion

Friday, June 15, 2012 8:16:41 PM
Re: scion post# 74583        
Post # 74588

06/14/2012 2 Report Commencing Criminal Action as to Robert Cotton - YOB: **/**/1950 Prisoner #: 00139-104 (rby) (Entered: 06/14/2012)

Doc 2 PDF file
viewer.zoho.com/docs/w5cbBf



---------------------------------

Rocket Man

Friday, June 15, 2012 9:24:38 PM
Re: janice shell post# 74587            
Post # 74589

So are you saying no one offshore goes short in sub penny stocks? Because it is profitable to do so!

---------------------------------

janice shell

Friday, June 15, 2012 9:36:36 PM
Re: Rocket Man post# 74589        
Post #  74590

Actually, it isn't profitable. And it has to be done IN the States, for reasons I explained.

So what do you think of the new info on the docket?

---------------------------------

future1

Friday, June 15, 2012 9:58:30 PM
Re: janice shell post# 74590        
Post #  74591

Janice- Are you surprised by the action? I'm pretty much thinking it is what was expected by most here on both sides. What else could have taken place other than the BS call by some here that Bob was on the run.

Completed the first order of business getting the current shipment out and then appeared in court to begin dealing with the legal issues. Was there a different scenario that should have played out in your opinion?

Just guessing, but I believe the pace of things will pick up in the near future.

---------------------------------

janice shell

Friday, June 15, 2012 10:06:23 PM
Re: future1 post# 74591        
Post #  74592

What's unusual is that the trial is scheduled to begin so soon. I wonder if that'll be postponed.

---------------------------------

Rocket Man

Friday, June 15, 2012 10:22:49 PM
Re: janice shell post# 74590        
Post #  74593

Besides the Docket. Lets stick with the 59k million shares that traded from $.004 - $.0006, just the first day CWRN's news came out on the Bribery Charges. That point in time where a perfect set up to short the stock was at hand. I will offer charts for those that need them.. But for now the math in simple terms show how profitable shorting stocks off shore can be.. Lets do the good fight folks.. Hit the ask and take shorty to the cleaners..

$.004 / .0006 is what? It equals 6.66666. 6.666 to keep it simple is 6.666 x 100 = 666.6% on shorties money.. We know the volume to date has not covered that even if it was half ed. That tells me since the question I asked if shares are shorted off shore went unaswered, suggests it does. I know it does.. So I will suggest that if longs look at the data and support their investment it would be a good time to hit the ask next week, as there is no way based on volume 30 million shares or better real close have been covered. We all know that there are loop holes to hid that sham data per FINRA...

So, again in your opinion is shorting from off shore done or not?

---------------------------------

Janice shell

Friday, June 15, 2012 10:25:20 PM
Re: Rocket Man post# 74593        
Post # 74594

Lets stick with the 59k million shares that traded from $.004 - $.0006, just the first day CWRN's news came out on the Bribery Charges.

You think that's odd? LOL!! Generally speaking, when a CEO is targeted by the DOJ, people run for the exits.

I know, I know. It's really Shorty's fault. Everything is Shorty's fault, right? NEVER the fault of the company or of management. Even when management gets arrested.

You still haven't explained to me about that offshore shorting. Bottom line: the stock is traded in the U.S., and in the U.S. only.


---------------------------------


General Grievous              

Friday, June 15, 2012 11:05:12 PM
Re: janice shell post# 74586            
Post # 74595

150 grand...wow..he MUST BE GUILTY (duh)..which is obvious otherwise the sec wouldnt waste their time considering there was an undercover op..to plead not guilty is being a COWARD...he shouldve just pleaded guilty..the evidence is piled up against him and doing so may have redued his sentence...another dumb move by idiot BOB...hope he doesnt run off now..I want to see this guy do TIME...Im so sick of all these penny stock ceo scammers..soooo sickkkk of them..If I was not guilty i wouldnt pay that much money just to get out..thats a lot of cash...I knew it from the beginning..this guy was painted by some to be a "honest veteran" wow..what a load of Cr@p..thats why I dont trust anyone...only my parents.

---------------------------------

JohnCM

Friday, June 15, 2012 11:09:32 PM
Re: janice shell post# 74592            
Post #  74596

"What's unusual is that the trial is scheduled to begin so soon. I wonder if that'll be postponed."

What are the odds of a plea or going to trial? I guess it depends on the strength of the discovery. If Bob pleads out there will be a healthy fine, but I wonder what restrictions he would receive. Business as usual? If it goes to trial, Bob's lawyer would have confidence the evidence is either weak or suspect.

I would expect a plea ... That is if a deal is offered.

---------------------------------

JohnCM

Friday, June 15, 2012 11:11:18 PM
Re: janice shell post# 74594            
Post # 74597

"I know, I know. It's really Shorty's fault. Everything is Shorty's fault, right?"

Don't know exactly why, but "shorty" talk does absolutely nothing for me ..

---------------------------------

bigredbill              
Friday, June 15, 2012 11:11:59 PM
Re: None
Post # 74598

For what it is worth, it looks like Bob did his homework and has a well credentialed and accomplished attorney.

davidmgarvin.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/12/DBR2.gif

The Firm of David M. Garvin, P.A. in Miami, Florida holds a Martindale-Hubbell AV Rating (Highest rating) and has been a member of the Bar Registry of Preeminant Lawyers, Criminal Attorney - Criminal Lawyer Section as well as a Martindale-Hubbell Preeminant Lawyer, Tax Attorney - Tax Lawyer Section member since 1999. Mr. Garvin has been selected by Super Lawyer Magazine each year since 2006 - White Collar Criminal Attorney - Criminal Lawyer and was selected for the Top Florida Lawyers List 2006 White Collar Criminal Attorney - Criminal Lawyer. Mr. Garvin was selected by Super Lawyers, Corporate Counsel Edition, and recognized as an outstanding attorney in the area of criminal defense : white colar crime. David M. Garvin is a Florida Bar Certified Tax Attorney since 1990, with a Masters in tax law 1987, a Juris Doctor in law 1982, and a Certified Public Accountant since 1982

--------------------------------

General Grievous              

Friday, June 15, 2012 11:12:58 PM
Re: Rocket Man post# 74589            
Post # 74599

Lol really? who would waste their time on a penny stock that gets maybe 2-4 grand worth of liquidy per day (when it was in the 003s) to think someone offshore is targeting a cheap penny stock with no liquidity is laughable imo...there are bigger fish to fry..funny how every penny stock i see go wrong always ends up in a tale of the shorts...let me guess we wills oon see a M.O.A.S.S.?

--------------------------------

JohnCM            

Friday, June 15, 2012 11:15:47 PM
Re: General Grievous post# 74595            
Post # 74601

"...he should've just pleaded guilty..the evidence is piled up against him and doing so may have reduced his sentence."

Let me school you just a bit right here. You DO NOT PLEAD GUILTY, if you are guilty or not. You always plead "not guilty" and then negotiate a plea. UNLESS, if you are not guilty, then you would not mind going straight to a jury trial.

This will plea out ...

---------------------------------

General Grievous              

Friday, June 15, 2012 11:16:39 PM
Re: janice shell post# 74594            
Post # 74602

Yes, why is rocket speaking of offshore shorting when there is no foreign ticker symbol?

----------------------------------

janice shell       

Friday, June 15, 2012 11:23:29 PM
Re: JohnCM post# 74596            
Post #  74603

Hard to guess the answer to that question. He can't have had much time to consult with his lawyer, so he may not have made his mind up about a lot of things.

A trial five weeks from now doesn't give him much time to prepare.

Last edited by MaxShockeR (2012-06-15 22:26:23)

Fortress Financial Group (fka FFGO)

Moderators:underdog150, SevenTenEleven, Rocket Man, Vianna, TomSawyer, Mike2211

http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/board.aspx?board_id=3111






SevenTenEleven 

Thursday, June 14, 2012 2:00:09 PM

Re: tatoo1 post# 202033

Post # of 202127

Ask TDA to put in writing that if a dividend is paid, you qualify.

Have a feeling TDA is working every angle.

Tic Toc



tatoo1   

Friday, June 15, 2012 10:49:43 PM

Re: SevenTenEleven post# 202040

Post # of 202127

Yea, since the reps persistence was telling.




OldBen 

Thursday, June 14, 2012 2:03:02 PM

Re: AlanC post# 202035

Post # of 202127

Besides the pictures, the numbers are also staggering. If memory serves, then, I think we sold about half of the S. Copperstone for about 65 million. So, if we sell the entire S. Copperstone for 130 million then that might be a reasonable price. Looks like Copperstone will be pulling a lot of gold out of the ground. Those were not "paper" assets that I was looking at in the pics LOL.




Vianna 

Thursday, June 14, 2012 6:18:14 PM

Re: varmit post# 201959

Post # of 202127

Thanks for sharing, varmit! LOL..."poor" E-Trade...

V

varmit Share Wednesday, June 13, 2012 2:31:01 PM
Re: None Post # of 202045

FFGO fresh off the phone w/ e-trade ...

asking me to write off shares to clean out the account and have a tax write off !!!

why its months until tax time ,,,almost a year in fact ,,,

my reply !!! no thanks : i will wait for my .007 -4.60 dividend come record date ....

seems odd to ask me to write off shares anyway......i have several other revolked stocks in my account and they never ask to write them off .....cmkx/ estt/ etc ...

so sumtin is up !!!!! yes indeed ,,, gold is up and keeps going up ......always will.

record date tells all !!!!!! varmy cares




Dhoraji   

Thursday, June 14, 2012 9:28:45 PM

Re: puppydotcom post# 202047

Post # of 202127

Yes, it is coming. Stay tuned.




varmit 

Thursday, June 14, 2012 10:13:10 PM

Re: None

Post # of 202127

FFGO Arizona ...

there is a large volume of miners in arizona talking about a compant going into the south copperstone gold mines and extrtaction over 10 million ounces of gold ,,,,

the neighbor american bonanza has copperstone open pit mine just several hundred yards away ,,,,,,, btw is doing very well on its processing .....

the hype is 2 pay american bonanza for the use of the processing mill they have set up ....pay in gold percentage ......

makes total sense to just haul ore a few hundred yards and process it ...... cutting costs of extraction and obtaining their own equipment ....

yes we will be paid our dividends when the final docs are notarized ...... tic toc is done time has come ...




varmit 

Thursday, June 14, 2012 10:19:58 PM

Re: puppydotcom post# 202036

Post # of 202127

ffgoarizona

yes the company is dead and delisted ..... they can relist for a few hundred bucks and issue divies ....

oh wait!!!!!!!!! they cant because nmgl owns those mines ffgo is done , gone , finished ,,,,,

nmgl press release coming soon 2 announce our record date

gold mines are big talk in arizona land ,,,bouse especially ....

the local miners seem 2 know more than we do ...afterall they are undermining the northern property line ......

divvies .007


SevenTenEleven 

Thursday, June 14, 2012 10:26:46 PM

Re: Dhoraji post# 202049

Post # of 202127

It sure is!

And there is nothing the brokers, bankers, and market makers could do about it!

Suggesting and insisting that shareholders take 100% losses, by allowing them to remove the shares, from shareholder accounts, is not working!

Even false claims about how the removal of shares impacts ownership are circulating now.

Ask the IRS what they think about taking a 100% tax write-off of shares. They will tell you that you forfeited those shares.

Yes, the IRS will confirm that if you take the 100% loss, you will NEVER see the 3449% gain!

Brokers, who are not paid to give investment advice, which would include, but would not be limited to ETrade, TDAmeritrade, and Scottrade "order takers", have no right to give investment or tax loss advice!

THEY ARE NOT FULL SERVICE INVESTMENT ADVISORS!

What will brokers, bankers, and market makers try next? Their time is running short!

Tic Toc




SevenTenEleven 

Saturday, June 16, 2012 12:22:51 AM

Re: tatoo1 post# 202098

Post # of 202127

That call was on a recorded line. It was recorded. So no matter what other broker representatives claim, the insistence of writing down shares is on record.




Rocket Man 

Saturday, June 16, 2012 12:54:28 AM

Re: SevenTenEleven post# 202099

Post # of 202128

B & SC are the BOMB!! The Neighbor is hitting pay dirt!!

Tic Toc




Rocket Man 

Saturday, June 16, 2012 12:54:36 AM

Re: SevenTenEleven post# 202099

Post # of 202128

Rumor has it, there is a new buzz with the SEC on the fact that folks arr trying to get traders to write down there shares.. I hear it is gaining traction.. Go FFGO!! Let set the reality of it all.. Nice!

B & SC are the BOMB!! The Neighbor is hitting pay dirt!!




SevenTenEleven 

Saturday, June 16, 2012 1:03:47 AM

Re: Rocket Man post# 202101

Post # of 202128

The SEC? No, more of interest with the IRS and the US Treasury I would assume.

FFGO - 3449% becoming much more!

Tic Toc




AlanC

Saturday, June 16, 2012 8:45:07 AM

Re: SevenTenEleven post# 202103

Post # of 202128

Could it be that our dividends, payment of which was approved by regulators, are being held back until the fraud and corruption in the system is fully exposed via the unwinding of these derivatives worldwide? If Greece goes under, Spain follows, then Italy, etc. until the Euro is wiped out along with trillions of debt, imagine the problems Jamie Dimon and the other investment banks will have. The fraud including all the selling of non existant shares of stock will be exposed for all the world to see.

Granted, cleaning up the mess will be a massive undertaking and the courtrooms will be packed but perhaps this is what it is going to take to get the world back on track. A currency that is actually backed by something of value, gold, silver, etc.. would have prevented our being in the mess we are now and likely is what we are going to have to have in the future. The world is in one heck of a mess to be sure because of the fraud committed by the banksters and remember the Federal Reserve is privately owned despite what many think. We will need more prison space to be sure.

Go FFGO!!!

Dividends of 3400%+ are worth waiting for!

PPS: Over 7 years and not a single charge made by U.S. regulators against any one of the folks associated with our company!




SevenTenEleven 

Saturday, June 16, 2012 8:49:23 AM

Re: AlanC post# 202104

Post # of 202128

FACT! Not a single share is being reported as short!

FACT! When dividend distribution is set, there should be no objections to payment of said dividend since there are ZERO short shares reported!

FACT! Brokers such as TDA are begging and pleading with shareholders to take 100% tax losses! Why should TDA care if a marker sits in someone's trading account?

FACT! No documentation has been provided to support claims that the dividend process is canceled. Just fancy talk and fantasy thinking.

Tic Toc




AlanC

Saturday, June 16, 2012 9:25:55 AM

Re: SevenTenEleven post# 202105

Post # of 202128

SevenTenEleven: All those facts you posted could well have been the result of a company/regulator agreed upon way to address the huge naked short that had been perpetrated on the company and its shareholders. An agreed upon settlement would also explain the commentary on the website which stated the company could not explicitly state an exact date as to when the dividend would be paid but mangement was confidant that when it was paid most shareholders would be pleased with the return on their investment.

When shareholders like you and I continued buying shares, especially after that cold winter day, the SEC felt it had no choice but to stop the accumulation of shares because things were taking longer than even the regulators expected. The liquidating dividends was a brilliant way to address this I just wish it wasn't taking this long to play out. FFGO has both the good guys and the bad guys trapped and the only way out as you have pointed out is for those who own shares to declare them to be worthless and only and idiot would do that when the alternative is a dividend that will generate $34,449.00 for every $1,000.00 invested.

Go FFGO!!!

Dividends of 3400%+ are worth waiting for!




AlanC

Saturday, June 16, 2012 9:39:45 AM

Re: indebt2 post# 202107

Post # of 202128

My opinion is the settlement has already happened and was posted for all to see on the company website long ago. I think we will be able to celebrate once we hear/read about a huge roundup of bad guys. Once accomplished, I think we will soon hear from the company regarding the distribution of our dividends.

Go FFGO!!!

Dividends of 3400%+ are worth waiting for!




SevenTenEleven

Saturday, June 16, 2012 10:43:34 AM

Re: AlanC post# 202108

Post # of 202128

AlanC, the Price Point that regulators should hold the naked short sellers accountable from is well over $4 per share. That is the price point (pre-splits) from which those illegally selling inventory into the system started targeting shareholders and investors.

But as we have heard, the SEC should not make sure that shareholders are compensated, and shareholders are not deserving of their just deserts. I guess that makes sense since those guilty of illegally naked short selling billions upon billions of shares into the system wold get their just deserts also.

The SEC should be under scrutiny. They have allowed the fleecing of FFGO shareholders and millions of other shareholders through their negligent jurisdiction.

Naked short sellers have influenced the regulators for years. In doing so, they have created a paper trail that leads back to a select few regulators, and regulatory offices.

IMO, it is a matter of time before they are forced to pay restitution for their crimes.

Tic Toc




SevenTenEleven 

Saturday, June 16, 2012 12:23:59 PM

Re: tatoo1 post# 202119

Post # of 202128

FFGO - Looking back on a few charts for FFGO, It appears that the stock hit roughly $0.016 back in 2007 (post split).

$0.016 x 2000 = $32 per share split adjusted!

What was the quoted price per share going across the screen on CNBC for weeks in 2008?




tatoo1   

Saturday, June 16, 2012 12:29:03 PM

Re: SevenTenEleven post# 202105

Post # of 202128

During the MF Global fiasco. I spoke with a TDA rep about the concerns I had. I asked him about TDA's clearing house. He told me TDA has their own clearing house.




SevenTenEleven 

Saturday, June 16, 2012 12:30:10 PM

Re: tatoo1 post# 202122

Post # of 202128

Yep! Which means that TDA may be loaded with illegal book entries! And not just for FFGO!

Tic Toc




tatoo1   

Saturday, June 16, 2012 12:36:20 PM

Re: SevenTenEleven post# 202109

Post # of 202128

It will take the system coming apart and coming down upon their heads and threatening their ill-gotten gains before true action is taken.



SevenTenEleven 

Saturday, June 16, 2012 12:42:44 PM

Re: tatoo1 post# 202124

Post # of 202128

I agree! How many regulators have been on the take since those selling illegal counterfeit shares, into the system, have been cashing in at the retail shareholders' expense?

FFGO shareholders will see reward for their patience.

Message to shareholders is clear! Brokers trying hard to close out open illegal positions!



BMFL<OD

next week(s) is here

Who's Next!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BfuWXRZe9yA

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pQBLi5mukmI


Shortmans Anthem!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fRge7lXu56