Michael Milken, 60,000 Deaths, and the Story of Dendreon (Chapter 13 of 15)


    What follows is PART 13 of a 15-PART series. The remaining installments will appear on Deep Capture in the coming days, after which point the story will be published in its entirety.

    Click here to read PART 1

    Click here to read PART 2

    Click here to read PART 3

    Click here to read PART 4

    Click here to read PART 5

    Click here to read PART 6

    Click here to read PART 7

    Click here to read PART 8

    Click here to read PART 9

    Click here to read PART 10

    Click here to read PART 11

    Click here to read PART 12

    Where we left off, we had learned that on March 29, 2007, an FDA advisory panel overwhelmingly voted to approve Provenge, a vaccine Dendreon developed for prostate cancer. As a result, most financial analysts and investors believed that Dendreon had a promising future.  However, ten hedge funds (out of a universe of 11,500 hedge funds) held large numbers of Dendreon put options (bets against the company), suggesting they had expected that Dendreon would be derailed. At least seven of those hedge funds can be tied to Michael Milken or his close associates.

    We had also learned that Milken himself stood to profit if Dendreon were to experience unexpected problems receiving FDA approval. This is because Milken was the early financier and principal deal maker for ProQuest Investments, a fund that (along with an affiliate) controlled a company called Novacea, which was one of Dendreon’s competitors in the race to produce a new treatment for prostate cancer. Meanwhile, Lindsay Rosenwald (a Milken crony who once helped run a Mafia-linked brokerage called D.H. Blair, which specialized in pumping and dumping fake biotech companies) controlled Cougar Biotechnology, which was Dendreon’s second competitor in the race to develop a treatment for prostate cancer.

    We had learned further that Milken’s “philanthropic” outfit, the Prostate Cancer Foundation, which appears to act in concert with Milken’s investment fund, ProQuest, had supported Novacea and Cougar, neither of which had shown that their treatments were safe or effective, while turning its back on Dendreon.

    In addition, we had learned that in April, 2007, Dr. Howard Scher, who was an executive and director of ProQuest, and the chairman of the Prostate Cancer Foundation’s “Therapeutic Consortium”, spearheaded an unprecedented lobbying effort to convince the FDA to deny approval to Dendreon’s treatment – the first time in history that the FDA had gone against an advisory panel’s recommendation to approve a drug destined for dying patients.

    In the days before and after the lobbying effort, Dendreon was subjected to a blistering attack by naked short sellers who illegally flooded the market with millions of phantom shares to help drive down the company’s stock price. This criminal naked short selling continued intermittently for much of the next two years, while other events conspired to hobble Dendreon, a company that had completed multiple clinical trials that strongly suggested that its product, Provenge, was capable of lengthening the lives of thousands of men with prostate cancer….

    * * * * * * * *

    In December 2007, three U.S. Congressmen — Mike Michaud (D-Maine), Dan Burton (R-Indiana) and Tim Ryan (D-Ohio) — called on the House Commerce Committee to investigate why the FDA failed to approve Dendreon’s treatment for prostate cancer. Referring to Dr. Scher and his ally, Dr. Hussain, the lawmakers said in a letter that “there are reasons to believe that serious ethics rules were violated by two FDA advisory panel members in their decision [to vote and lobby against Dendreon] and that these violations played a role in the subsequent FDA decision not to approve Provenge at this time.”

    A bipartisan group of 12 additional Congressmen eventually signed on to the request for an investigation. And in February 2008, as outrage over this scandal spread through the medical community, a group of seven respected doctors, calling themselves “Physicians for Provenge” wrote a letter to the ranking members of the House Commerce Committee, suggesting that the investigation should urgently proceed.

    “Please consider why our colleagues and we KNOW that Provenge works and why tens of thousands of men with late stage prostate cancer should be given access to it,” the physicians wrote. Noting the “egregious conflicts of interest” of Dr. Scher and Dr. Hussain, the “Physicians for Provenge” added that the “FDA should be carefully assessing risk versus reward for the treatment of terminally ill patients, rather than ‘gate keeping’ based on outdated statistics, reducing short-term health costs or backroom shenanigans.”

    Nonetheless, Commerce Committee Chairman John Dingell denied the requests for an investigation. To justify this decision, Dingell wrote in a letter to the committee that an “investigative hearing prior to an agency’s final decision runs the risk of interfering with the normal regulatory process.”

    Apparently, it was fine if FDA-contracted doctors and government officials tied to Michael Milken corrupted the normal regulatory process by obfuscating approval standards (“substantial evidence” versus “proof”) and by drafting unsolicited post-vote letters with back-channel help from a government employee who was weeks away from taking a new job created by Michael Milken.  But investigating such improprieties would corrupt the regulatory process, in the eyes of Commerce Committee Chairman John Dingell.

    Dingell also pointed out that “a new law strengthening conflict of interest provisions now governs FDA panels.” Unfortunately, that law was passed in September 2007, some months after Milken’s conflicted allies derailed Dendreon’s application.

    In any case, it is not clear that the old conflict of interest provisions were not violated in the Dendreon case. Dr. Scher received a conflict of interest waiver, but in his application for that waiver he did not mention his financial ties to Milken’s ProQuest Investments. There should have been an investigation into why that waiver was granted. And while he was at it, Representative Dingell should have investigated the illegal naked short selling of Dendreon and the “backroom shenanigans” of Milken’s captured officials at the FDA and the National Cancer Institute.

    At any rate, while the congressional investigation was being stopped in its tracks, Milken’s Prostate Cancer Foundation was becoming more brazen.

    In March 2008, for example, the Prostate Cancer Foundation sent out a peculiar mass mailing. Written by a cardiologist on Prostate Cancer Foundation letterhead, the mailing began, “I’ll never forget the day my 5-year-old son came home from school, worried. One of the other kids told him I was going to die.”

    The letter went on to describe the horrors of being diagnosed with prostate cancer. So far, all kosher. But then came the strange part – the charity’s solicitation explicitly promoted a mostly untested experimental treatment that was being developed by a public company that was considered to be one of the few competitors to Dendreon. The treatment was called GVAX, and the company developing it was called Cell Genesys.

    The author of the letter noted that during his treatment, he had “learned about some of the groundbreaking research projects supported by the Prostate Cancer Foundation, such as GVAX, a drug now in phase 3 clinical trials that boosts the immune system to fight off prostate cancer cells.”

    Notice that the name of the drug – GVAX – was printed in boldface letters, so nobody could miss it. Notice, too, the underlining, which stressed that this treatment (as opposed to others, such as Dendreon’s) was endorsed and supported by the Prostate Cancer Foundation. And, finally, notice the unequivocal statement that GVAX works – that it “boosts the immune system” and is able to “fight off” cancer.

    Lest there be any question that Milken was eager to promote GVAX, the Prostate Cancer Foundation, soon after, began distributing flyers at supermarkets and shopping malls with a similar message. “My 5-year-old didn’t want to lose his daddy,” read the flyers, which then proceeded to describe a “groundbreaking” new medicine – GVAX.

    At the time, Cell Genesys was nowhere near bringing GVAX to market. It had just finished phase 2 clinical trials on a total of 65 patients. Lab results showed that GVAX might increase prostate cancer antibodies, but they did not show that the immune system was actually boosted in such a way as to better “fight off” cancer or improve survival. Phase 3 trials, which would determine whether GVAX actually improved the health of patients, had just begun.

    But if you were an average Joe who read those flyers – or a wealthy Mary who received that solicitation in the mail – you’d be mighty convinced that Cell Genesys was the next big thing in cancer therapy. You might even be tempted to buy its stock.

    * * * * * * * *

    When Milken’s Prostate Cancer Foundation began distributing his fliers promoting GVAX, a number of hedge funds had accumulated large numbers of shares in Cell Genesys.

    One of these was Millennium Management, the hedge fund that had been founded by the fellow who planned to murder Ivan Boesky when it seemed that Boesky might cooperate with the authorities in their case against Milken. Again, Millennium is one of those seven hedge funds that had the foresight to own put options in Dendreon back in March 2007, right before Dendreon’s treatment was unexpectedly scuttled by the FDA.

    Another hedge fund with a big stake in Cell Genesys was Forest Investment Management, owned by Michael Boyd, the father of hedge fund shill Roddy Boyd, currently of Fortune Magazine.  Michael Boyd, remember, had previously been involved in two big ventures – one with a former Milken colleague from Drexel Burnham; the other with Santo Maggio, the convicted criminal CEO of Refco Securities.

    Hedge fund Perceptive Advisors also held a moderately large stake in Cell Genesys. Recall that Perceptive was then run by Joseph Edelman, who was not only another one of those seven hedge fund managers who held put options in Dendreon, but was also simultaneously serving as a trader for Paramount Capital.

    As you might recall, the vice president of Paramount Capital was a former employee of Milken crony Steve Cohen, who was also one of those seven hedge fund managers betting big against Dendreon. The owner of Paramount, of course, is Lindsay Rosenwald, who used to run the Mafia-controlled D.H. Blair with Milken’s former national sales manager, and controlled Cougar Biotechnology, another Dendreon competitor promoted by the Prostate Cancer Foundation.

    Another big buyer of Cell Genesys shares was Mazama Capital, a hedge fund based in California. In December 2006, Mazama also owned 2.1 million shares of Dendreon. It dumped more than a million of those shares sometime before or immediately after the March advisory panel meeting, when it seemed certain that Dendreon would receive FDA approval.

    Only one other hedge fund dumped similar quantities of Dendreon shares at that time. It was JL Advisors, which is controlled by the above-mentioned Steve Cohen. This dumping of shares contributed to the selling volume that was amplified by whoever was selling massive amounts of phantom stock in Dendreon.

    Then there was Renaissance Technologies, which held 800,000 shares in Cell Genesys when Milken’s “philanthropy” began promoting the company.  The CFO of Renaissance is James Rowen, who was previously the chief financial officer of SAC Capital, the hedge fund run by the above-mentioned Steve Cohen, who is known to be maniacal about making sure that his former employees remain satellites of his trading empire.

    Meanwhile, hedge funds Balyasny Asset Management and Visium Capital held a combined 12 million shares of Cell Genesys. Balyasny and Visium have overlapping ownership (Dmitry Balyasny is a partner in both hedge funds) though they don’t generally disclose that in their SEC filings.

    Dimitry Balysasny is a close associate of Steve Cohen. He has employed some of those former SAC Capital traders and managers with whom Cohen maniacally maintains relationships. And he and Cohen have attacked the same companies.

    As I mentioned, Balyasny was one of our seven hedge fund managers with large numbers of put options in Dendreon. I will return to him, because this enigmatic Russian might have more surprises in store for Dendreon.

    * * * * * * * *

    Three weeks after Milken’s Prostate Cancer Foundation began publicly promoting Cell Genesys’s virtually untested prostate cancer treatment, Cell Genesys announced that it had signed a gargantuan $320 million deal to develop and commercialize GVAX with Takeda Pharmaceutical, the Japanese biotech giant.

    The press reported this deal dutifully and uncritically, making it sound like GVAX was the next big thing. The stock price soared, earning large profits for the Milken-network hedge funds that had invested in Cell Genesys.

    But just as there was something fishy about the Milken-invested Novacea and its $500 million deal with Schering Plough, so too did the “$320 million” Cell Genesys deal deserve a hearty dose of skepticism.

    For starters, only days before Cell Genesys announced the Takeda deal, Takeda had bought a company called Millennium Pharmaceuticals. Millennium had been transformed into Takeda Pharmaceutical Capital Ventures. It was Takeda Capital Ventures, not the Takeda parent company, that signed the deal with Cell Genesys.  In other words, it was almost certain that Millennium’s management, most of whom had been retained by Takeda Capital, orchestrated the whopping $320 million deal.

    That was rather strange because Millennium had been founded by a man named Mark Levin. It was Levin who orchestrated Millennium’s merger with LeukoSite, the biotech company that belonged to Marty Peretz, the Boesky-Milken crony who founded TheStreet.com. And more important to this particular episode,  it was Levin who had founded Cell Genesys. He founded the company basically by investing in himself (just as Domain Associates had created the Milken-invested Novacea out of thin air).

    So, assuming Levin still had influence over Millennium/Takeda, and assuming he was still invested in Cell Genesys, he had just orchestrated a deal to use other people’s money to invest $300 million in himself.

    Or, at least Cell Genesys’s press release said that Takeda (which was, in fact, Millennium) was going to “pay Cell Genesys an upfront payment of $50 million and additional milestone payments totaling up to $270 million…Takeda [actually Millennium, now known as Takeda Capital Ventures] will pay Cell Genesys tiered, double-digit royalties based on net sales of GVAX immunotherapy for prostate cancer…”

    Sounds good, doesn’t it? Sounds like those “net sales” are imminent, right? In fact, just as the Milken-invested Novacea’s $500 million deal was dependent on clinical trials showing good results, so too was Cell Genesys’s big deal with itself dependent on the company producing some evidence that it’s drug actually worked. The operative phrase in that press release was “milestone payments totaling up to $270 million.”

    Of course, just three months later, Cell Genesys announced that it had halted its trials of GVAX after its Independent Data Monitoring Committee, in a “routine safety review meeting,” observed “an imbalance of deaths…”  In other words, GVAX was not helping patients. It was killing them. And, of course, the $270 million worth of “milestone payments” announced with so much fanfare were unceremoniously canceled.

    Either before this announcement, or immediately after, the big investors in Cell Genesys – Mazama, Balyasny, Millennium, Perceptive Advisors – all dumped their shares. Given the big boost those shares got from Milken’s Prostate Cancer Foundation promotions and the giddy announcement that Cell Genesys would receive $330 million, we can assume that those investors made a nice profit on their sales, just as Milken’s ProQuest and affiliated funds made nice profits on their sales of Novacea.

    It seems to me that Cell Genesys, like Novacea, was a sophisticated pump and dump scam, aided by Michael Milken’s  “philanthropic” outfit, the Prostate Cancer Foundation.

    Which brings us to Cougar Biotechnology, the third Dendreon “competitor” promoted by Milken’s Prostate Cancer Foundation.  Cougar Biotechnology, as we know, was controlled by Lindsay Rosenwald, who used to help run D.H. Blair, the Mafia-linked pump-and-dump shop whose two vice chairman pled guilty to securities crimes, and whose president was Milken’s former national sales manager.

    D.H. Blair was indicted on 173 counts of securities fraud, and it was notorious for pumping and dumping biotech companies with no real medicine. But who knows? Maybe Cougar has a genuine product. It is hard to say at the moment, and will remain that way for years to come, because its prostate cancer treatment remains virtually untested.

    In any case, just last month, Cougar, no doubt aided by the Prostate Cancer Foundation’s vigorous endorsements, wangled a $1 billion deal to merge with Johnson & Johnson, so Rosenwald and friends did quite well on their investments.

    Remember that while Milken’s Prostate Cancer Foundation was using unwitting donors’ money to promote Novacea, Cougar Biotechnology, and Cell Genesys, its top officials, and perhaps Milken himself, were actively seeking to derail Dendreon, the one company that actually had a promising treatment for prostate cancer. This was certainly to the benefit of the short sellers (some of whom were illegally naked short selling) and the buyers of put options who were betting big against Dendreon

    Meanwhile, it should be noted that Cougar Biotechnology experienced almost no naked short selling, according to SEC “failures to deliver” data. The Milken-invested Novacea also experienced virtually zero naked short selling, even after it announced that its treatment was killing people. The same goes for Cell Genesys — relatively little naked short selling, even when its treatment flopped.

    The miscreant party line is that hedge funds do not engage in naked short selling to manufacture phantom stock. The party line is that most “failures to deliver” are the result of mechanical “errors.” It’s funny how those “errors” tend to occur when miscreants in a certain network are short a company. It’s also funny that those “errors” don’t happen to companies in which Milken and his cronies are invested.

    If only there were a pattern.

    * * * * * * * *

    To be continued…Click here for Chapter 14.

    This post was written by:

    - who has written 88 posts on Deep Capture.


    Contact the author

    65 Responses to “Michael Milken, 60,000 Deaths, and the Story of Dendreon (Chapter 13 of 15)”

    1. lenofus says:

      http://www.house.gov/dingell/contact.shtml

      Just soes ya have it handy. Never know. Someone may want to contact the man.

      • tom waits says:

        Lenofus, everyone should blast off emails,letters,faxes/phone calls to Dingell’s office demading he now ask Congress to hold hearings on this subject! Its time akcje’s bosses join Bernie Maddoff in jail!

    2. akcje says:

      _

      Mark Mitchell > It seems to me that Cell Genesys, like Novacea, was a sophisticated pump and dump scam,

      Shame on you Mitchell to imply that the doctors and scientists involved in cancer research are scam artists, except for those developing Provenge.

      In you zealous attempt to view everything as a vast conspiracy, you are using the same dirty techniques that you accuse others of…

      • fordwill1953 says:

        akcje, you wimped out of Investor Village’s DNDN message board because you took beating after beating. So, you are here trying to sneak in your phony contempt for DNDN? Hey, if the Cartel was so afraid of the story, there’d be an injunction against it already and a lawsuit claiming defamation. Problem is, such would cause the court to seek out documents, documentation and probably launch an investigation of the facts from the bench…. all things detestable to those that like to operate in the shadows.

        Here’s where the Cartel is vulnerable… “In you (sic) zealous attempt to view everything as a vast conspiracy…” hmmmmmm. Let’s just say that it is a coincidence of about 1000 independent factors. LOLOLOLOLOLOL….

      • tom waits says:

        akcje I do believe he said Milken and his cronies HFs! Made no mention of the scientist and Dr’s! Wake you idiot! Oh I forgot you’re just doing what your paid to do! Not working here everyone has your number just like they did on the IV board!

      • Don says:

        Hey buddy , you really need to read up on Milken…This man will blank his own mother for a buck ,He is a monster from hell..Just ask all the people he stole from in the 60 s 90 s aand all the American men he has help kill for a buck….

        STOP DEFENDING THIS MONSTER AKCJE

        • akcje says:

          _
          Don > STOP DEFENDING THIS MONSTER AKCJE

          I hear you. But I’m not defending Milken. Never did.
          What gave you this idea?

    3. ncans4d says:

      Isn’t it safe to say that a legal short sale, without a confirmed pre-borrow, is, after the three day (T+3) mandated settlement period, then an illegal naked short sale? Therefore, the combination of stricter State laws governing both the pre-borrow, and the T+3 Settlement would severely restrict the possibility of naked shorting. Would that not be a step or two in the right direction?

      • Roxie says:

        The SEC and the former NASD have done nothing for ten years plus other then throw out new obstructive new rules to make sure these criminals never get shut down or arrested. Why do you think they are going to start now? I see Chris Cox just signed on with a major law firm as a just reward for looking the other way while America burned. Trillions of stolen dollars and massive fraud and only a few token crooks are doing jail. Why is that?

        • Kilroy.Killbasher says:

          Roxie, apparently because key legislators and enforcement personnel are “deeply captured”. I wonder what kind of favors Dingell got for his quashing of the investigation?

          • Marv Eatinger says:

            Kilroy.Killbasher: It appears that I should have submitted the following email to John Dingell instead of Carl Levin even though they are both from Michigan!

            —– Original Message —–
            From: marv eatinger
            To: fraudnet@gao.gov ; casework@grassley.senate.gov
            Cc: hawked@sec.gov
            Sent: Thursday, June 04, 2009 8:10 PM
            Subject: A BREAKDOWN OF THE SYSTEM OF DEMOCRATIC CAPITALISM!!!!! “NAKED SHORT SELLING” !

            Marv Eatinger Says:
            June 4th, 2009 at 5:02 pm
            Abusive “Naked Short Selling” to lower the price of the target company is illegal! How about abusive “Naked Short Selling” in order to cover those “Naked Short” sales three years after the fact with actual trades of 1/100th plus two “EXTERNALLY ADDED ZEROS” enabling the original “Naked Short Sellers” to never pay capital GAIN taxes to the IRS. “NAKED SHORT SELLING” IS DESTRUCTIVE TO THE DEMOCRATIC SYSTEM OF CAPITALISM!!!

            iStandUp Says:
            June 4th, 2009 at 10:46 am

            Sean, thanks for the below specter.senate.gov link!

            http://specter.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?FuseAction=NewsRoom.NewsReleases&ContentRecord_id=a77729db-9371-b8e0-c5e8-872f87fc6d3f

            Daleco Resources Corp, or Daleco Resources Corporation or Daleco Resources in 1995 was listed on the Canadian Dealing Network and the NASDAQ Small Cap Market. On the NASDAQ the symbol was DLOVF and on the CDN apparently Daleco had two symbols DLOV & DLVO. I have an email from the Toronto Exchange ( R. Joseph) that states that in the 1 &1/2 years that Daleco was listed on the CDN that NO volume was ever recorded as traded for Daleco Resources Corporation ( I am assuming symbol DLOV). He also stated that Daleco was never cleared for quotation but only for trading! But, when I went to a Canadian web site for stocks I also found Daleco Resources Corporation listed with a symbol of DLVO! On October 1, 1996 when Daleco legally moved its incorporation from Ontario Canada to Delaware USA the symbol for Daleco Resources Corporation on the NASDAQ Small Cap Market dropped the F and became DLOV. Now Daleco was DLOV on the NASDAQ and DLOV on the CDN and DLOV on the Alberta Exchange and DLVO also on the CDN.

            Then on about December 1, 1996 (according to public filings & derived from my “DUE DILIGENCE”) through January 1997 Daleco traded more than 10,000,000 Regulation “S” common shares supposedly sold in May of 1996 & Sept. of 1996.

            Now the question becomes were these Regulation “S” shares or some of these Regulation “S” shares a cover for the NAKED SHORT SELLING of approximately 7,000,000 of Daleco’s common shares and the buy back to cover these short sales three years later (Feb. 28, 2000 to Aug. 1, 2000) while DLOV & DLVO had been listed only on the Pink Sheets. Daleco finessed the regulatory system by effecting two 1 for 10 reverse splits in Feb. of 1998! Daleco then comes back while on the Pink Sheets in the spring of 2000 and covers approximately 7,000,000 Naked Short Sales three years earlier with approximately 70,000 actual shares traded and the addition of two zeros (see WALL STREET EQUITIES, INC. NEW YORK BROKER) added to this staged trading of Daleco Resources Corporation from Feb. 28, 2000 to Aug. 1, 2000.

            Now you need to question whether Daleco through Sustainable Forest Industries, Inc. and Daleco Resources Corporation of Yukon Territory, Canada (withdrawn in August of 2000) were associated with the sale and conversion of Regulation “S” shares. Did the Naked Short Selling and the sale of Regulation “S” shares go both ways?

            Do we have approximately 7,000,000 common shares of Daleco Resources Corporation as included in Daleco’s issued and outstanding common stock that have never been issued and died as approximately 600 stockholders of record were eliminated in fiscal 2006 and put back in fiscal 2007???? Are these COUNTERFEIT shares diluting current shareholder equity?????

            Marv Eatinger

            ================================================================================

            SECURITY DELETIONS (FROM http://WWW.OTCBB.COM DAILY LIST)
            Dl Date Symbol Company Name Effective Date/Comments
            2/22/2001 DLVOE** Daleco Resources Corporation 2/23/2001 Failure to comply with NASD Rule 6530

            ============================================================================================================
            ANTICIPATED ADDITIONS
            DL Date Symbol Company Name Effective Date OATS
            Reportable
            Flag Comments
            6/11/1999 DLOV** Daleco Resources Corporation 6/11/1999

            SECURITY ADDITIONS
            DL Date Symbol Company Name Effective Date OATS
            Reportable
            Flag Comments
            6/14/1999 DLOV** Daleco Resources Corporation 6/14/1999

            SYMBOL CHANGES
            DL Date Date Old Symbol New Symbol/Name
            1/24/2000 1/26/2000 DLOV** DLOVE Daleco Resources Corporation

            SECURITY ADDITIONS
            DL Date Symbol Company Name Effective Date OATS
            Reportable
            Flag Comments
            7/28/2000 DLOV** Daleco Resources Corporation 7/28/2000

            ANTICIPATED ADDITIONS
            DL Date Symbol Company Name Effective Date OATS
            Reportable
            Flag Comments
            7/28/2000 DLOV** Daleco Resources Corporation 7/28/2000

            SYMBOL CHANGES
            DL Date Date Old Symbol New Symbol/Name
            1/22/2001 1/24/2001 DLOV** DLOVE Daleco Resources Corporation

            SECURITY ADDITIONS
            DL Date Symbol Company Name Effective Date OATS
            Reportable
            Flag Comments
            3/6/2002 DLOV** Daleco Resources Corporation 3/6/2002

            SYMBOL CHANGES
            DL Date Date Old Symbol New Symbol/Name
            12/10/2004 12/14/2004 DLOV DLOVE Daleco Resources Corporation Common Stock

            DIVIDENDS
            Record Date Symbol Company Name Dividend Type
            1/6/2005 DLOV Daleco Resources Corporation Common Stock Stock Div. payable in another company

            SECURITY ADDITIONS
            DL Date Symbol Company Name Effective Date OATS
            Reportable
            Flag Comments
            3/11/2005 DLOV Daleco Resources Corporation Common Stock 3/14/2005 From NBB (DLOV) **

            SYMBOL CHANGES
            DL Date Date Old Symbol New Symbol/Name
            1/16/2008 1/18/2008 DLOV DLOVE Daleco Resources Corporation Common Stock

            ===============================================================================
            —– Original Message —–
            From: “Ron Franz”
            To:
            Sent: Tuesday, April 04, 2006 10:13 AM
            Subject: Re: [CSI Website Query: daily volume figures multiplied by 100 - symbol DLOV]

            >I had them remove the extra digits.
            > Yahoo should have it corrected by this afternoon.
            > Please let me know if you do not see the corrections.
            > Thank You,
            >
            >
            > marv@mitec.net wrote:
            >> Regarding:
            >> Data Error Report
            >>
            >>
            >> Message:
            >> On March 7, 2000 the following web sites showed volume for the day for DLOV – Daleco Resources CP of 2,300 shares: FinancialWeb.com and Quicken.com.
            >>
            >> On March 8, 2000 the following web sites showed volume for the day for DLOV – Daleco Resources CP of 26,200 shares: FinancialWeb.com, Quicken.com and MSN Money Central.com.
            >>
            >> On March 13, 2000 Barchart.com showed DLOV – Daleco Resources Corp volume for the day as 2,000 shares.
            >>
            >> Daleco Resources Corp was deleted from the OTCBB to the Pink Sheets on February 22, 2000 to be effective on February 28, 2000. Yahoo Finance & MoneyCentral web sites are presently the only web sites that I can find that show Historical Volume figures for the time period of March 1, 2000 to August 1, 2000 when Daleco Resources Corp was listed only on the Pink Sheets.
            >>
            >> Yahoo Finance Historical Volume figures for the above mentioned dates is shown as follows:
            >> March 7, 2000——————–230,000 shares
            >>
            >> March 8, 2000——————2,620,000 shares
            >>
            >> March 13, 2000——————200,000 shares
            >>
            >> Apparently from the period starting March 1, 2000 to August 1, 2000, all trades that took place in Daleco’s stock had two zeros added to the daily trading volume!
            >>
            >>
            >> From:
            >> marv@mitec.net

            1 Trackbacks For This Post
            Deep Capture Forum is now live » YoGoG.com Says:
            May 22nd, 2009 at 12:49 pm
            ===============================================================================

            Email & Contact Center
            Thank you for contacting me regarding a problem you are having with a federal agency.

            The following information has been emailed to Senator Levin:

            Regarding: agency

            Agency: irs
            Name: Mr. Marv Eatinger,
            711 no 92ct #408
            Omaha, NE 68114
            Phone: 402-391-7536
            Email: maeating@aol.com
            Comments: Abusive “Naked Short Selling” to lower the price of the target company is illegal! How about abusive “Naked Short Selling” in order to cover those “Naked Short” sales three years after the fact with actual trades of 1/100th plus two “EXTERNALLY ADDED ZEROS” enabling the original “Naked Short Sellers” to never pay capital GAIN taxes to the IRS. “NAKED SHORT SELLING” IS DESTRUCTIVE TO THE DEMOCRATIC SYSTEM OF CAPITALISM!!! iStandUp Says: June 4th, 2009 at 10:46 am Sean, thanks for the below specter.senate.gov link! http://specter.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?FuseAction=NewsRoom.NewsReleases&ContentRecord_id=a77729db-9371-b8e0-c5e8-872f87fc6d3f Daleco Resources Corp, or Daleco Resources Corporation or Daleco Resources in 1995 was listed on the Canadian Dealing Network and the NASDAQ Small Cap Market. On the NASDAQ the symbol was DLOVF and on the CDN apparently Daleco had two symbols DLOV & DLVO. I have an email from the Toronto Exchange ( R. Joseph) that states that in the 1 &1/2 years that Daleco was listed on the CDN that NO volume was ever recorded as traded for Daleco Resources Corporation ( I am assuming symbol DLOV). He also stated that Daleco was never cleared for quotation but only for trading! But, when I went to a Canadian web site for stocks I also found Daleco Resources Corporation listed with a symbol of DLVO! On October 1, 1996 when Daleco legally moved its incorporation from Ontario Canada to Delaware USA the symbol for Daleco Resources Corporation on the NASDAQ Small Cap Market dropped the F and became DLOV. Now Daleco was DLOV on the NASDAQ and DLOV on the CDN and DLOV on the Alberta Exchange and DLVO also on the CDN. Then on about December 1, 1996 (according to public filings & derived from my “DUE DILIGENCE”) through January 1997 Daleco traded more than 10,000,000 Regulation “S” common shares supposedly sold in May of 1996 & Sept. of 1996. Now the question becomes were these Regulation “S” shares or some of these Regulation “S” shares a cover for the NAKED SHORT SELLING of approximately 7,000,000 of Daleco’s common shares and the buy back to cover these short sales three years later (Feb. 28, 2000 to Aug. 1, 2000) while DLOV & DLVO had been listed only on the Pink Sheets. Daleco finessed the regulatory system by effecting two 1 for 10 reverse splits in Feb. of 1998! Daleco then comes back while on the Pink Sheets in the spring of 2000 and covers approximately 7,000,000 Naked Short Sales three years earlier with approximately 70,000 actual shares traded and the addition of two zeros (see WALL STREET EQUITIES, INC. NEW YORK BROKER) added to this staged trading of Daleco Resources Corporation from Feb. 28, 2000 to Aug. 1, 2000. Now you need to question whether Daleco through Sustainable Forest Industries, Inc. and Daleco Resources Corporation of Yukon Territory, Canada (withdrawn in August of 2000) were associated with the sale and conversion of Regulation “S” shares. Did the Naked Short Selling and the sale of Regulation “S” shares go both ways? Do we have approximately 7,000,000 common shares of Daleco Resources Corporation as included in Daleco’s issued and outstanding common stock that have never been issued and died as approximately 600 stockholders of record were eliminated in fiscal 2006 and put back in fiscal 2007???? Are these COUNTERFEIT shares diluting current shareholder equity????? Marv Eatinger ================================================================================ SECURITY DELETIONS (FROM http://WWW.OTCBB.COM DAILY LIST) Dl Date Symbol Company Name Effective Date/Comments 2/22/2001 DLVOE** Daleco Resources Corporation 2/23/2001 Failure to comply with NASD Rule 6530 ============================================================================================================ ANTICIPATED ADDITIONS DL Date Symbol Company Name Effective Date OATS Reportable Flag Comments 6/11/1999 DLOV** Daleco Resources Corporation 6/11/1999 SECURITY ADDITIONS DL Date Symbol Company Name Effective Date OATS Reportable Flag Comments 6/14/1999 DLOV** Daleco Resources Corporation 6/14/1999 SYMBOL CHANGES DL Date Date Old Symbol New Symbol/Name 1/24/2000 1/26/2000 DLOV** DLOVE Daleco Resources Corporation SECURITY ADDITIONS DL Date Symbol Company Name Effective Date OATS Reportable Flag Comments 7/28/2000 DLOV** Daleco Resources Corporation 7/28/2000 ANTICIPATED ADDITIONS DL Date Symbol Company Name Effective Date OATS Reportable Flag Comments 7/28/2000 DLOV** Daleco Resources Corporation 7/28/2000 SYMBOL CHANGES DL Date Date Old Symbol New Symbol/Name 1/22/2001 1/24/2001 DLOV** DLOVE Daleco Resources Corporation SECURITY ADDITIONS DL Date Symbol Company Name Effective Date OATS Reportable Flag Comments 3/6/2002 DLOV** Daleco Resources Corporation 3/6/2002 SYMBOL CHANGES DL Date Date Old Symbol New Symbol/Name 12/10/2004 12/14/2004 DLOV DLOVE Daleco Resources Corporation Common Stock DIVIDENDS Record Date Symbol Company Name Dividend Type 1/6/2005 DLOV Daleco Resources Corporation Common Stock Stock Div. payable in another company SECURITY ADDITIONS DL Date Symbol Company Name Effective Date OATS Reportable Flag Comments 3/11/2005 DLOV Daleco Resources Corporation Common Stock 3/14/2005 From NBB (DLOV) ** SYMBOL CHANGES DL Date Date Old Symbol New Symbol/Name 1/16/2008 1/18/2008 DLOV DLOVE Daleco Resources Corporation Common Stock =============================================================================== —– Original Message —– From: “Ron Franz” To: Sent: Tuesday, April 04, 2006 10:13 AM Subject: Re: [CSI Website Query: daily volume figures multiplied by 100 - symbol DLOV] >I had them remove the extra digits. > Yahoo should have it corrected by this afternoon. > Please let me know if you do not see the corrections. > Thank You, > > > marv@mitec.net wrote: >> Regarding: >> Data Error Report >> >> >> Message: >> On March 7, 2000 the following web sites showed volume for the day for DLOV – Daleco Resources CP of 2,300 shares: FinancialWeb.com and Quicken.com. >> >> On March 8, 2000 the following web sites showed volume for the day for DLOV – Daleco Resources CP of 26,200 shares: FinancialWeb.com, Quicken.com and MSN Money Central.com. >> >> On March 13, 2000 Barchart.com showed DLOV – Daleco Resources Corp volume for the day as 2,000 shares. >> >> Daleco Resources Corp was deleted from the OTCBB to the Pink Sheets on February 22, 2000 to be effective on February 28, 2000. Yahoo Finance & MoneyCentral web sites are presently the only web sites that I can find that show Historical Volume figures for the time period of March 1, 2000 to August 1, 2000 when Daleco Resources Corp was listed only on the Pink Sheets. >> >> Yahoo Finance Historical Volume figures for the above mentioned dates is shown as follows: >> March 7, 2000——————–230,000 shares >> >> March 8, 2000——————2,620,000 shares >> >> March 13, 2000——————200,000 shares >> >> Apparently from the period starting March 1, 2000 to August 1, 2000, all trades that took place in Daleco’s stock had two zeros added to the daily trading volume! >> >> >> From: >> marv@mitec.net

            WASHINGTON
            269 Russell Office Building
            U.S. Senate
            Washington, DC 20510-2202

            Phone (202) 224-6221
            Fax (202) 224-1388
            TTY (202) 224-2816
            8:30 a.m. – 6:00 p.m.

            MICHIGAN

            Senator Levin has seven offices in Michigan that help constituents with federal agencies.
            office locations >

            ——————————————————————————–

            Privacy Policy
            Frequently Asked Questions
            Site Help
            269 Russell Office Building – Washington, DC 20510 – (202) 224-6221

            XHTML
            CSS
            Section 508
            Website designed and built by The Pod Project.

            Email & Contact Center
            Thank you for contacting me regarding a problem you are having with a federal agency.

            The following information has been emailed to Senator Levin:

            Regarding: agency

            Agency: irs
            Name: Mr. Marv Eatinger,
            711 no 92ct #408
            Omaha, NE 68114
            Phone: 402-391-7536
            Email: maeating@aol.com
            Comments: Abusive “Naked Short Selling” to lower the price of the target company is illegal! How about abusive “Naked Short Selling” in order to cover those “Naked Short” sales three years after the fact with actual trades of 1/100th plus two “EXTERNALLY ADDED ZEROS” enabling the original “Naked Short Sellers” to never pay capital GAIN taxes to the IRS. “NAKED SHORT SELLING” IS DESTRUCTIVE TO THE DEMOCRATIC SYSTEM OF CAPITALISM!!! iStandUp Says: June 4th, 2009 at 10:46 am Sean, thanks for the below specter.senate.gov link! http://specter.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?FuseAction=NewsRoom.NewsReleases&ContentRecord_id=a77729db-9371-b8e0-c5e8-872f87fc6d3f Daleco Resources Corp, or Daleco Resources Corporation or Daleco Resources in 1995 was listed on the Canadian Dealing Network and the NASDAQ Small Cap Market. On the NASDAQ the symbol was DLOVF and on the CDN apparently Daleco had two symbols DLOV & DLVO. I have an email from the Toronto Exchange ( R. Joseph) that states that in the 1 &1/2 years that Daleco was listed on the CDN that NO volume was ever recorded as traded for Daleco Resources Corporation ( I am assuming symbol DLOV). He also stated that Daleco was never cleared for quotation but only for trading! But, when I went to a Canadian web site for stocks I also found Daleco Resources Corporation listed with a symbol of DLVO! On October 1, 1996 when Daleco legally moved its incorporation from Ontario Canada to Delaware USA the symbol for Daleco Resources Corporation on the NASDAQ Small Cap Market dropped the F and became DLOV. Now Daleco was DLOV on the NASDAQ and DLOV on the CDN and DLOV on the Alberta Exchange and DLVO also on the CDN. Then on about December 1, 1996 (according to public filings & derived from my “DUE DILIGENCE”) through January 1997 Daleco traded more than 10,000,000 Regulation “S” common shares supposedly sold in May of 1996 & Sept. of 1996. Now the question becomes were these Regulation “S” shares or some of these Regulation “S” shares a cover for the NAKED SHORT SELLING of approximately 7,000,000 of Daleco’s common shares and the buy back to cover these short sales three years later (Feb. 28, 2000 to Aug. 1, 2000) while DLOV & DLVO had been listed only on the Pink Sheets. Daleco finessed the regulatory system by effecting two 1 for 10 reverse splits in Feb. of 1998! Daleco then comes back while on the Pink Sheets in the spring of 2000 and covers approximately 7,000,000 Naked Short Sales three years earlier with approximately 70,000 actual shares traded and the addition of two zeros (see WALL STREET EQUITIES, INC. NEW YORK BROKER) added to this staged trading of Daleco Resources Corporation from Feb. 28, 2000 to Aug. 1, 2000. Now you need to question whether Daleco through Sustainable Forest Industries, Inc. and Daleco Resources Corporation of Yukon Territory, Canada (withdrawn in August of 2000) were associated with the sale and conversion of Regulation “S” shares. Did the Naked Short Selling and the sale of Regulation “S” shares go both ways? Do we have approximately 7,000,000 common shares of Daleco Resources Corporation as included in Daleco’s issued and outstanding common stock that have never been issued and died as approximately 600 stockholders of record were eliminated in fiscal 2006 and put back in fiscal 2007???? Are these COUNTERFEIT shares diluting current shareholder equity????? Marv Eatinger ================================================================================ SECURITY DELETIONS (FROM http://WWW.OTCBB.COM DAILY LIST) Dl Date Symbol Company Name Effective Date/Comments 2/22/2001 DLVOE** Daleco Resources Corporation 2/23/2001 Failure to comply with NASD Rule 6530 ============================================================================================================ ANTICIPATED ADDITIONS DL Date Symbol Company Name Effective Date OATS Reportable Flag Comments 6/11/1999 DLOV** Daleco Resources Corporation 6/11/1999 SECURITY ADDITIONS DL Date Symbol Company Name Effective Date OATS Reportable Flag Comments 6/14/1999 DLOV** Daleco Resources Corporation 6/14/1999 SYMBOL CHANGES DL Date Date Old Symbol New Symbol/Name 1/24/2000 1/26/2000 DLOV** DLOVE Daleco Resources Corporation SECURITY ADDITIONS DL Date Symbol Company Name Effective Date OATS Reportable Flag Comments 7/28/2000 DLOV** Daleco Resources Corporation 7/28/2000 ANTICIPATED ADDITIONS DL Date Symbol Company Name Effective Date OATS Reportable Flag Comments 7/28/2000 DLOV** Daleco Resources Corporation 7/28/2000 SYMBOL CHANGES DL Date Date Old Symbol New Symbol/Name 1/22/2001 1/24/2001 DLOV** DLOVE Daleco Resources Corporation SECURITY ADDITIONS DL Date Symbol Company Name Effective Date OATS Reportable Flag Comments 3/6/2002 DLOV** Daleco Resources Corporation 3/6/2002 SYMBOL CHANGES DL Date Date Old Symbol New Symbol/Name 12/10/2004 12/14/2004 DLOV DLOVE Daleco Resources Corporation Common Stock DIVIDENDS Record Date Symbol Company Name Dividend Type 1/6/2005 DLOV Daleco Resources Corporation Common Stock Stock Div. payable in another company SECURITY ADDITIONS DL Date Symbol Company Name Effective Date OATS Reportable Flag Comments 3/11/2005 DLOV Daleco Resources Corporation Common Stock 3/14/2005 From NBB (DLOV) ** SYMBOL CHANGES DL Date Date Old Symbol New Symbol/Name 1/16/2008 1/18/2008 DLOV DLOVE Daleco Resources Corporation Common Stock =============================================================================== —– Original Message —– From: “Ron Franz” To: Sent: Tuesday, April 04, 2006 10:13 AM Subject: Re: [CSI Website Query: daily volume figures multiplied by 100 - symbol DLOV] >I had them remove the extra digits. > Yahoo should have it corrected by this afternoon. > Please let me know if you do not see the corrections. > Thank You, > > > marv@mitec.net wrote: >> Regarding: >> Data Error Report >> >> >> Message: >> On March 7, 2000 the following web sites showed volume for the day for DLOV – Daleco Resources CP of 2,300 shares: FinancialWeb.com and Quicken.com. >> >> On March 8, 2000 the following web sites showed volume for the day for DLOV – Daleco Resources CP of 26,200 shares: FinancialWeb.com, Quicken.com and MSN Money Central.com. >> >> On March 13, 2000 Barchart.com showed DLOV – Daleco Resources Corp volume for the day as 2,000 shares. >> >> Daleco Resources Corp was deleted from the OTCBB to the Pink Sheets on February 22, 2000 to be effective on February 28, 2000. Yahoo Finance & MoneyCentral web sites are presently the only web sites that I can find that show Historical Volume figures for the time period of March 1, 2000 to August 1, 2000 when Daleco Resources Corp was listed only on the Pink Sheets. >> >> Yahoo Finance Historical Volume figures for the above mentioned dates is shown as follows: >> March 7, 2000——————–230,000 shares >> >> March 8, 2000——————2,620,000 shares >> >> March 13, 2000——————200,000 shares >> >> Apparently from the period starting March 1, 2000 to August 1, 2000, all trades that took place in Daleco’s stock had two zeros added to the daily trading volume! >> >> >> From: >> marv@mitec.net

            WASHINGTON
            269 Russell Office Building
            U.S. Senate
            Washington, DC 20510-2202

            Phone (202) 224-6221
            Fax (202) 224-1388
            TTY (202) 224-2816
            8:30 a.m. – 6:00 p.m.

            MICHIGAN

            Senator Levin has seven offices in Michigan that help constituents with federal agencies.
            office locations >

            ——————————————————————————–

            Privacy Policy
            Frequently Asked Questions
            Site Help
            269 Russell Office Building – Washington, DC 20510 – (202) 224-6221

            XHTML
            CSS
            Section 508
            Website designed and built by The Pod Project.

    4. tom waits says:

      Mark great job! Question regarding Dingle. Have you check him out to see if he has any ties to these lowlife SOB’s. In particular his campaign contributions he received.

    5. Tiny Tim says:

      So Roddy’s “innocent” Dad was “coincidentally” also involved with the same cast of miscreants in yet another identical sort of scam/manipulation.

      I wonder what Roddy’s comeback to the chapter 13 coincidence involving his father being involved in another biotech scam will be? “Em, er, I’m sure that too was some sort of innocent hedging or other sort of completely legitimate, you know, thing, and just because he out of 10,000 hedge funds happened to also be in on it means nothing.”

      Can’t wait to hear the dissembling, assuming he even shows his face here again. Although it is going to start sounding like the proverbial “I was just holding the drugs for a friend, those aren’t mine” defense from every lowlife on COPS, it might be amusing to watch him go through the motions.

    6. Judgement day coming says:

      John Dingle….Another conflicted, bought off politician, that lives off our dime.

      There is no honor amongst thieves.

      You would think John would have his hands full trying to save the auto industry, and trying to keep people employed in Michigan, or maybe keeping Lake Michigan clean and the asian beetle out, but no, he’s helping derail a cure for cancer.

      How much money does it take to blur the line between sustaining life with a cure for cancer or enrich ones self at the expense of 60,000 people.

      Oh, crooks and politicians
      they will co-mingle
      the story gets more bizarre
      with the addition of John Dingle

      John…Welcome to the SPOTLIGHT!!!!

    7. NCANS4d,
      The problem is not the laws. The problem is enforcing the laws. The settlement cycle rule already makes failing to deliver illegal in every single case, regardless of who does it or why. Federal and state statutes also already forbid market manipulations and missrepresentations.

      So it’s not that the laws are faulty or need fixing, enforcement of the laws is what needs to be established. And that is far harder to do. Right now, enforcement is left to the discretion of the agencies. That’s the problem. So Congress or the states can adopt any law they want “fixing” the problems, but if enforcement is not changed – nothing will change. These agencies are already not enforcing the laws regarding settlement and manipulation.

      IMHO, if the laws are to be changed, realistic enforcement mechanisms must made law. The key element to this is to lay down very specific metrics that define violations and violators, which then trigger automatic penalties or license actions against the violators, without any discretion left to any agencies.

      The ultimate penalty would then be permanent license revocation. Can you imagine Goldman Sachs without a securities license? They would be a mere commercial bank without any securities dealings whatsoever, except in those dealt and issued exclusively within the borders of NY.

      These legal enforcement mechanisms can occur at the state level, because state authorities must license each individual interstate securities dealer, broker or broker/dealer. State authority also applies to the clearing and settlement firms – DTCC, DTC, NSCC, etc…

      All of the prime brokers have 50 individual state licenses, that is one from each state.

    8. akcje says:

      _

      fordwill1953 > you wimped out of Investor Village’s DNDN message board because you took beating after beating.

      Are you one of those brave boys who love to beat up on somebody who is held down by others?

      You know very well that some of my posts have been deleted by the IV board owner and he limited my posting on DnDn board.
      Now, you almost got the DnDn board as you like it. A board where everybody sings the same tune. No matter how false it sounds.

      fordwill1953 > So, you are here trying to sneak in your phony contempt for DNDN?

      I’ve no contempt for DnDn. For over two years I’ve posted that Provenge should have been approved. You know it. But weak minds prefer lies. It is much easier to attack a fictional character you build, than to face the truth. Truth is too complicated for the ones like you. And the Mitchell’s saga is designed to cater to the weak minds. I’m not surprised that so many on DnDn board love it.

      There have been real bad decisions made by the FDA, fueled by conflicts of interests, and or pure stupidity. And Mitchell reiterates some of these, as they were publicized already.

      There is plenty of wrong and dishonest with the stock market, banks and funds, including the rules and enforcement. Naked shorting being just one small example. The DeepCapture fixation on this example helps to obfuscate underlying problems.

      90% of this Mitchell’s saga is repeating many times whose father is who, who new whom or worked with whom in the same company. It would make a good gossip column. But there are two more chapters. Let’s see if he comes up with anything new.

      = = =

      tom waits > I do believe he said Milken and his cronies HFs!

      No. He wrote what I’ve quoted:
      “It seems to me that Cell Genesys, like Novacea, was a sophisticated pump and dump scam,”
      clearly implying that these companies were build with the aid of Milken to in order to scam other people. If he doesn’t mean it, he is free to correct this.

      tom waits > Oh I forgot you’re just doing what your paid to do!

      Sure, you paranoid Sherlock. Perhaps DeepCapture should employ you. Your priceless intellect has shone on the Dendreon board.

      • kelatious says:

        Mark,
        Great reporting. It’s a good thing we have guys like you since mainstream media seems to be nearly 100% captured.

        Thanks,
        kel

        • Kilroy.Killbasher says:

          kelatious, so true. The “captured” mainstream investigative reporters are either on the take, pressured by their bosses who are, or they are the most inept and pussyfooting reporters in the history of journalism. Currently, the best financial investigative reporting seems to be coming from:

          1. DeepCapture.com
          2. Rolling Stone Magazine
          3. Comedy Central (Stewart interview with Cramer)

          This has to be embarrassing to American mainstream financial reporters when you’re far outdone by a comedy channel. BTW, thanks, Jon Stewart! I loved seeing Cramer squirm like that!

          And, of course, a standing ovation for Mark Mitchell’s “Expose’ of the New Millinneum” as far as I’m concerned. I anxiously await the closing chapters!

    9. uk says:

      Enjoyed the read, but a bit left hung out as to what evolved with the senate investigation that still is in critical need.

    10. Anonymous says:

      Tom,
      I couldn’t agree more with your statement.

      “The problem is not the laws. The problem is enforcing the laws.”

      A little off topic, but the law and how it is handled is the same when it comes to fraud. We recently learned the Obama Administration decides to turn the Justice Department inside out and focus more on deferred prosecution for just paying the ill gotten gains back without criminal charges. This even hold true with HEALTHCARE fraud for which several million dollars of fraud was laid in their lap and they prefer to just settle the case for pennies on the dollar. Imagine that. It would seem the crooks stay in business, live on to commit more crimes for a fraction of the ill gotten gains they illegally obtained. This I know first hand.
      Sound familiar ? Sound like companies who are determined to viloate the laws but buy their way out without admitting or denying wrongdoings? Our leaders no matter what party are the real crooks for allowing this behavior to continue. Shame on the all you and you know who you are. You sold your souls to the devil. No longer is wrong wrong, but for the right money, wrong is right.

      • Anonymous:

        I agree that the problem can not be solved if politicians are involved. Thank God that in several states, there is a way to get the Uniform Commercial Code changed by specifically bypassing all politicians.

        In California, the Ballot Measures bypass all politicians to make law. If such an important and large state were to revoke the securities license of any NY based prime brokers or broker/dealers – the securities system would have to change to adopt to the more strict CA standards.

        Not only is CA too large and important a state in the USA for the securities industry, but there is also no practical way to create two securities markets with one for CA and another for the other 49 states.

        California has demonstrated it has this nationwide influence, such as when the CA state environmental standards for scores of emissions and vehicles became stricter than the federal standards.

        In the end, almost the entire country has adopted the stricter CA standards, as has the EPA, despite clawing, kicking, screaming and lawsuits going all the way up the US Supreme Court – all to to try and derail CA authority and the entire CA scheme.

        So if we can get the California Commercial Code – Section 8 – amended to make sure criminals will loose their securities licenses in California, that would have nationwide ramifications.

        No out of state broker, dealer or prime broker/dealer could function, if it was prohibited from trading securities issued by any CA issuer or with any customers or funds domiciled in CA. Not to speak of the bad public perception that would rain down on such a broker/dealers if CA yanked their licenses – even temporarily.

        • Kilroy.Killbasher says:

          Tom, since the federal government is obviously captured and going to do nothing regarding justice for these miscreants, the state level [i]does[/i] sound like a good “Plan B”. However, I wonder if it could be successful unless the states were to do something simultaneously. Even though California is such a huge chunk of our national economy, this is what I would fear.

          As soon as California were to announce such a proposal, these extremely deep-pocketed and influence-wielding miscreants would find the appropriate “targets” to stifle it. If they can “buy it dead”, they’ll do that. If not, they’ll muster so much support from their “captured” power players on the federal level to intimidate the state regulators to the point where they will cower.

          It’s just my opinion, and I wish it were otherwise. However, you know how their concerted effort from various angles can convince most who haven’t kept up with their shenanigans that they must be on the wrong track since so many political contributors are against them. It seems to cower them every time.

          • ncans4d says:

            http://www.theallstreetjournal.org

            In this downloadable booklet, designed to help educate our state legislators, there’s a page devoted to how the ‘powers’ pushed back against the seemingly righteous attempts to curtail their ability to naked short. It looks like there will have to be another booklet produced, one that will pin down how to increase the enforcement of the laws already on the books. There has to be new ruling regarding pre-borrowing, which is now laughably non-existent. There has to be new ruling on punishment for non-compliance with the T+3 settlement rule, something as simple as letting the trial attorneys have at the miscreants. Wouldn’t that be a sight?

    11. Bluto says:

      Having worked in the medical commercialisation field, I’m afraid to have to report that Doctors and Scientists can be just as venal as Lawyers and stock traders. Please don’t allow them to be put on a pedestal. Some deserve it, some don’t.

      Secondly, I fixated on the word “payment” in the story of Cell Genasys. Now the reason I fixated on it is that a certain extremely orthodox Jewish investor held my feet to the fire by using that word. He is a nice guy, very tough, but ultimately honest.

      In a research agreement of the type that no doubt would have existed with Cell Genasys the word “payment” can have a multitude of meanings like “conditional payment”, “reimbursement”, payment of labour costs, etc. etc., but when it sits out bald on it’s own, it can mean whatever you want it to mean..or not. That’s why you should never use it on its own in any agreement, and especially not a research agreement – you will argue endlessly over what it means.

      and a P.S. In any biotech deal, its the value of your equity that counts – royalty payments are almost always years and years away.

    12. Kilroy.Killbasher says:

      Oh, BTW please remember the Deep Capture FORUMS (link at the top of the page). These comments are attached to the bottom of each chapter, whereas the FORUMS are one central location broken down into specific categories making it much easier and more permanent as well as keeping the subject matter from being fragmented.

      Another beauty of the FORUMS is that the paid stock bashers (and probably pump and dumpers as well) are afraid to post there. One paid basher, mkaykay0, who poses as a shareholder on the Raging Bull CMKI board, but in actuality is one of Janice Shell’s paid basher crew (if not Janice herself), will bravely rip right into anyone on Raging Bull. However, when DeepCapture FORUMS was mentioned, she said she was “not brave”. She posted that she was scared that her IP address would be logged on Deep Capture. She said she would be hunted down by Patrick Byrne and done physical harm if this rotten-toothed, newbie investor grandmother (that’s what she portrays herself as) were to post an opposing view there. ROFL!

      If they don’t like it, then I’m all for it!

      Since the bashers avoid it, it’s a great place to converse about the miscreants without their customary diversionary tactics, such as spamming to quickly scroll down any pertinent posts they want to bury. And, unlike Raging Bull and Investors Hub (IHUB), you won’t be banned and your posts won’t be deleted just for posting an opposing view.

      • ravenseye says:

        thank you Mark for all that you share, and here is to hoping all your hard work and research gets lots of regulatory attention, and real regulatory reform follows!

        “And, unlike Raging Bull and Investors Hub (IHUB), you won’t be banned and your posts won’t be deleted just for posting an opposing view.”

        you got that right Kilroy.Killbasher so true, i’ll add silicon investor does the same. it seems admin has a preference for the dark side, especially for how they’ve catered to incarcerated for rico etc Elgindy. it’s like a bee hive of stock critics with the exception of a few. ironically ADVFN untill recently (6/22/09) owned both ihub and si. probably figured it best to distance from si after the sec on May 20, 2009 named “Defendant Matthew Brown, who operates a penny stock website called investorsHub.com.” http://www.sec.gov/litigation/complaints/2009/comp21053.pdf
        “SEC Charges Eight Participants in Penny Stock Manipulation Ring”
        http://www.sec.gov/litigation/litreleases/2009/lr21053.htm
        being matt also acted as admin on si. deep capture has already featured several si posters, and advfn probably didn’t want the liability of the bias that is ever so prevalent in my opinion. hmmm, any one know who is behind TZ holdings LLC of Missouri? my guess is bob is holding his baby, again! a little history: Bob Zumbrunnen, President/CEO of Investors Hub, the company who acquired Silicon Investor from InfoSpace in May of 2003…In September 2006, ADVFN acquired investorshub.com and Silicon Investor…

        ADVFN sells SiliconInvestor and Talkzilla websites
        22 June 2009

        ADVFN has sold the websites Siliconinvestor.com and Talkzilla.com to TZ Holdings LLC of Missouri, USA.

        Siliconinvestor.com was part of the purchase transaction when ADVFN acquired Investorshub.com in 2006. Talkzilla is an early stage experimental bulletin board project that has since been developed internally in the USA.

        The consideration for the transaction is $200,000 in cash for the properties and shares in TZ Holdings LLC giving ADVFN a 15% shareholding….
        read the rest at http://www.smallcapnews.co.uk/article/ADVFN_sells_SiliconInvestor_and_Talkzilla_websites/7680.aspx

        • ravenseye says:

          btw ADVFN’s Chief Executive Officer, Clem Chambers according to wikipedia (ta-da) “is a familiar face and frequent co-presenter on CNBC”.
          … ditto mark “If only there were a pattern.”

        • Interesting reading that I only just now encountered.

          Yes, Ravenseye, I’m the man behind the curtain known as TZ Holdings LLC. The TZ, btw, is short for my other project that’s near and dear to my heart, Talkzilla.Com. It’s currently (and sadly, I must say) parked in the corner of the garage while I fix what’s broken about SI as a business and brand that went 3 years not even remotely fathomed by its then owners. Coming along nicely finally and I’m starting to be able to put time into where the rubber meets the road: the site/membership relationship. Eventually TZ will get the Bob-love it deserves, as I think it has serious potential as a topic-agnostic portal/board.

          Regarding SI having a bit of a penchant for the dark side (bashers, shorts, skeptics, or, as I would call them “The awake” or “Missourians”), there’s some truth to that and it’s hard to gauge if people read too much or too little into it.

          Before I became an employee in 97 (laid off in 2001, took over iHub in 2002, bought SI in 2003 and gave iHub part of it to make up for its loss of a lot of my attention but not my paycheck, sold in 2006, bought again this year), I was what some would call a “basher”. Often in stocks I owned. I applied and tried to teach critical thinking and lack of emotion when it came to stocks. And though I favor people who do, which is a reason I admire Janice Shell and, yes, Tony Elgindy (whether he truly did what he was accused of — and he was convicted on really lightweight stuff), who on the aggregate I felt did the entire market a lot of good by his online presence. Tony would break site rules and I’d suspend him. Janice doesn’t and she doesn’t get suspended. I don’t play favorites there. Some of my best friends are former suspendees.

          Raging Bull? In-house, we called it “SI Australia” because it was an upstart who would’ve never survived the cradle if not for their having started right when penny stock frauds were running rampant on SI, I refused to boot people simply because they were accused of “lying” about these wonderful (and now nonexistent) companies or being “paid bashers” (I still don’t believe there’s such a thing as I’ve never been given more than loud opinion on the matter), and the touts and their shee… I mean fellow “investors” left for the greener pastures of RB. RB was to SI what Australia used to be to the United Kingdom.

          Matt an admin on SI? No, unless he filled in for Dave occasionally.

          ADVFN trying to rid themselves of a liability? Nah. Bob saving his baby from a parent company who, not being American, just really couldn’t appreciate the brand clout SI used to have and that was eroding and while saving his baby, leaving a situation that just really didn’t suit him.

          When you’re the alpha male of the pack for a lot of years and don’t have to ask anyone for permission to seize a job that you define as you see fit and channel all of your OCD into it, then suddenly you’re another cog in a wheel and not very empowered at all, it’s just not fun. I missed the struggle to always make things better as a community, site, and business, and I have that again. I’m a helluva lot poorer for it financially, but it’d be hard to find a happier man.

          Regarding bashers and touts and how I might feel about them or how my site deals with them, though I proudly wore the “basher” badge, I was proud because I did it without resorting to less than civil conduct. I hate a foul-mouthed “sell this stock cuz I say so” basher as much as I hate the same in a tout. If all someone’s going to give me is opinion, they could at least act intelligent and mature enough to have some credibility, thank you very much.

          The site and whoever is Admin at the time sees no distinction between basher and tout. People break the rules or they don’t. It’s that simple.

          Stock message boards aren’t (IMO) places to go to feel warm and fuzzy about some stock you bought. They’re places to intelligently discuss stocks both pro and con. Not only stocks but trading and investing strategies and the like, as well.

          I don’t care if Silicon Investor is ever the biggest such site around, as it used to be. If it is the most civil and the opinions offered are presented in the most mature and credible way, and in the process enough traffic is generated that I don’t starve, that’s plenty good enough for me.

          Bob Zumbrunnen
          Managing Partner
          TZ Holdings LLC (owner of SiliconInvestor.Com and Cars.Talkzilla.Com)

    13. sean says:

      From Cutty on investorsvillage..

      Re: Cockroaches going bananas…
      Like Louisiana cockroaches surprised by sudden light
      and frantically scurring for cover, the characters in the
      cesspool of the DeepCapture series are moving with
      great speed.

      A mere two weeks after the DeepCapture series began,
      the once highly touted Dr Alison Martin is gone as CEO
      of Melanmona Research Alliance, and all mention of her
      stricken from the MRA website. Dr Martin’s embarrassing
      email to Dr Sher, suggesting a method of derailing
      Provenge has surfaced. So with the speed that recalls
      the midnight Gestapo visits, Michael Milken’s minions
      have suddenly appeared as the new managers at Debra
      and Leon Black’s MRA organization.

      Cockroaches for sure.

      • Kilroy.Killbasher says:

        Sean, here is another example of the cockroaches scurrying to clean up the trail they left:

        http://echotoall.com/blog/2007/05/30/dr-howard-scher-is-slime/

        If you will note, there is a blue link “article” in the text, which was supposed to take you to the criminal evidence the poster had found. According to the URL it takes you to, it was on the Novacea site, but SURPRISE, SURPRISE! The page is no longer there.

    14. ginger says:

      The following is a partial list of media contacts that might be useful in raising awareness of this site as well as the Market Reform Movement, and the Naked Short Selling crisis. It is by no means exhaustive, and if anyone has additional contact suggestions, please email them to ncans.mgr@gmail.com.

      Bulls & Bears
      Bullsandbears@foxnews.com

      Hannity & Colmes, Sean Hannity
      Hannity@foxnews.com

      Cashin’ In
      Cash@foxnews.com

      Hannity & Colmes, Alan Colmes
      Colmes@foxnews.com

      Cavuto on Business
      Cavuto@foxnews.com

      Heartland w/ John Kasich
      Heartland@foxnews.com

      CNBC – Ron Insana, Streetsigns
      Streetsigns@cnbc.com

      DaySide
      Dayside@foxnews.com

      On the Record with Greta
      Ontherecord@foxnews.com

      Forbes on FOX
      Forbes@foxnews.com

      Special Report with Brit Hume
      Special@foxnews.com

      FOX & Friends
      Friends@foxnews.com

      Studio B with Shepard Smith
      Studiob@foxnews.com

      FOX News Live
      Feedback@foxnews.com

      The Beltway Boys
      Beltway@foxnews.com

      FOX News Live Weekend
      Feedback@foxnews.com

      The Big Story with John Gibson
      Myword@foxnews.com

      FOX News Sunday
      FNS@foxnews.com

      The O’Reilly Factor
      Oreilly@foxnews.com

      FOX News Watch
      Newswatch@foxnews.com

      War Stories
      Warstories@foxnews.com

      Your World with Neil Cavuto
      Cavuto@foxnews.com

    15. Kilroy.Killbasher:

      You miss the point that a proposed law, passed via ballot measure, is put on the ballot via citizen initiative, not due to anything politicians do or even can do. There is nobody to buy off and the politicians can’t do anything against it even if theyt tried. However, as night follows day, Wall Street would certainly try to scare people to vote against the measure when it comes up to a vote on the state wide ballot.

      It works like this:

      1. In california, you pay $200 to submit the text of a proposed new law.
      2. Then you need to supply 433,971 voter signatures of registered voters on a petition form supporting the initiative.
      3. If the minimum number of signatures are supplied within 90 days, the proposed law is put on the ballot for the next state wide voting cycle. At this point it’s a simple up or down vote to enact the law or not. Nobody can stop it from appearing on the ballot after this point.

      So it would be important to word the text of the amended California Commercial Code so that violators are penalized under state jurisdiction. I came up with just suspending and revoking their state licenses, since these are needed by the violators to keep operating.

      It works in the medical field, where doctors rely on state licensing and can be put out of business by simply revoking their licenses.

      Insurance companies are similar. States regulate then and they can be convinced to undo their crimes under the threat of having their licenses suspended or revoked. It’s good leverage and one area nobody can argue that the states have no authority.

      All securities firms and broker/dealers that do business in California need a California state securities license, as they do from every state.

      If somebody has a different and better idea of how the states can get leverage over Wall Street firms to stop their disregard for the law – I’m all ears.

      Written into the text of the proposed law, a precise definition of what a violation is would need to be included along with what the exact consequences would be – without any further discretionary powers to anyone – which would simply be action against their California securities licenses.

      This avoids monetary penalties and all the problems that entails. It is not even clear to me if the states have jurisdiction to demand and collect monetary penalties.

    16. mhelburn says:

      Tom,
      Referendums can be deadly. The one that froze real estate taxes in California has helped bankrupt them because there was no offsetting cut in spending.

      Now there is an investigation into the kickbacks paid to secure access to public employees’ pension plans. The Car Czar Steve Rattner is implicated and has resigned. Many believe it is because his presence in the administration will smear the President. Those involved made large political contributions to various officials. Illinois was notorious for the pay to play schemes and it is wide-spread in the pension arena. These pay to play schemes had to have been known the states’ highest officials. If they didn’t know, they should have known. They were responsible for appointing the people in charge of the funds and accepted contributions from those getting the payments.

      The statute of limitations should be changed to when the fraud is discovered, not when the fraud happened. The delays that legislators and regulators like Dingle or the SEC create interfere with prosecutions. Dingle’s decision to stop an investigation had one purpose and it is transparent. An investigation would not interfere with a process. It would only uncover wrongdoing. This was simply a way to aid the perps. http://tpmmuckraker.talkingpointsmemo.com/2009/07/did_pay-to-play_probe_cause_rattners_resignation.php?ref=m1

    17. mhelburn says:

      Another example of having the laws, but not enforcing them… see last paragraph…

      Removing the scum from the pension funds. Who would have thought that the public employees’ funds would be as tainted as the union funds which were controlled by the Mob?

      http://www.omm.com/new-federal-and-state-pay-to-play-developments-05-18-2009/

      Just reading through recent legislation at the states’ level. Those securing contracts from government are barred or limited in giving campaign contributions to those making the decisions..

      These new laws address some of the corrupting influence of political contributions and show that the people are tired of officials on the take.

      The “placement agent” is an extortionist. The people responsible for the funds use the intermediaries to get a cut beyond what they are paid to manage the funds.. Not only do the intermediaries get a cut, they secure campaign contributions for those who allow them to be the gatekeepers to the funds. All of this is coming out of pensions that were earned or are guaranteed by the taxpayer.

      There are many articles coming out about this.
      “Under federal and NY state law, any agent that brokers deals between the private investment firms seeking pension fund money and the government or political officials doling out the money, must be a registered securities broker, with the occasional exception allowed. Cuomo’s investigation, however, found that 40-50% of so-called ‘placement agents’ seeking investments from the NY State and City pension funds are unregistered.” http://abcnews.go.com/Blotter/story?id=7481344&page=1

      • Tom Vallarino says:

        mhelburn:

        I agree bad laws can be adopted via ballot initiatives. That does not mean that good ones can’t be adopted. The enforcement issue also makes clear that when framing a new law, the enforcement issue is made a part of the law. One way to do it is to spell out how the law will be enforced, not proposing a new law and leaving it out there. To me that’s like writing a story without a proper conclusion and ending.

        So an amendment to the California Commercial Code would not only need to be intelligently written as to what acceptable and not acceptable behavior would be, but also how to enforce these standards of behavior.

        Important is also to note that these amendments would not cost the state any money. In fact, they would be beneficial as the value of the securities accounts would be protected, keeping more money within the state with all the economic benefits that come with that.

        I know this is a CA centric view, but in reality, since CA is so big and important, the entire securities market would have to adopt the higher standards if CA goes that way.

    18. Anonymous says:

      Daylight meet COCKROACH :

      http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4MH_oz9f1E4

      YouTube – Congressman Stearns: Mr Paulson How Do You Have …

      6 min – 4 days ago -

      Rated 5.0 out of 5.0

      Congressman Stearns: Mr Paulson How Do You Have Any Credibility? … Congressman Stearns’ Remarks on CF Awareness Resolution …
      http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4MH_oz9f1E4

    19. Kevin says:

      SEC can’t be regulated.

      http://www4.law.cornell.edu/uscode/html/uscode12/usc_sec_12_00000250—-000-.html

      § 250. Independence of financial regulatory agencies

      No officer or agency of the United States shall have any authority to require the Securities and Exchange Commission, the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation, the Comptroller of the Currency, the Director of the Office of Thrift Supervision, the Federal Housing Finance Board, or the National Credit Union Administration to submit legis rlativeecommendations, or testimony, or comments on legislation, to any officer or agency of the United States for approval, comments, or review, prior to the submission of such recommendations, testimony, or comments to the Congress if such recommendations, testimony, or comments to the Congress include a statement indicating that the views expressed therein are those of the agency submitting them and do not necessarily represent the views of the President.

    20. sean says:

      Excerpt from this story http://www.marketwatch.com/story/goldman-should-pay-paulson-a-1-billion-bonus

      Does this sound like any character we may be reading about in the Dendreon Debacle

      Get ready for the next bubble
      The recent grilling of Paulson took me back to those dark days last October, just before the election, as the world’s credit markets, banking system and economies were about to fall off a cliff and trigger a second Great Depression. Back then I wrote a column titled “Paulson’s new ‘Global Banking Corp.’ IPO.” See column.

      In the column, I outlined the plot points for a sequel to Oliver Stone’s 1989 hit movie, “Wall Street,” with Hank Paulson as a new prototype for Gordon Gekko, emerging from the slammer after 20 years. In the plot, I saw Gekko planning his big post-release move, preparing for a bigger global empire, honing his skills by operating like a Mafia Don running his gang from inside a super-max, running a hedge fund from his cell on a smuggled-in laptop. The new subtitle could read: “The Nudger Who Outdid Ponzi and Madoff, and Got Away with It.”

    21. Fred says:

      This looks like classic pump-n-dump happening right now: Cobra Oil CGCA, run by a Mr. Pozzoni ( perfect name, yes ) recommended a ‘buy’ with a target of $3.65 by Cohen Independent Research: http://finance.yahoo.com/news/Cohen-Independent-Research-bw-152809345.html?x=0&.v=1

      http://www.cohenresearch.com/

    22. iStandUp says:

      Dr. Jim DeCosta,

      I just noticed your posts under the chapter 10. Good to see you posting again in DeepCapture. I and others have missed seeing your regular input in DeepCapture.

      ——vvv—–vvv———-
      Some questions have come up about Rule 204T, which is set to EXPIRE in LESS THAN 2 weeks on July 31, 2009.

      I wonder what you think about its effectives in general (maybe you have written a letter to the SEC already and can supply us with a link.)

      It is NOT clear to me How Long Does Market Maker have to cover his/her Naked Counterfeit Short Sales?

      I read that if shares are not delivered on T+3, on T+4, in the morning of, shares must be purchased or borrowed. So does this mean that on T+6 or T+7 the shares must be delivered?

      Another confusing factor in my mind is that Senator Kaufman stated in his letter to the SEC in April? that Market Makers or Naked Shorts had 13 days to deliver stock to a seller, but the buyers have only 3 days to deliver money.

      • harveydawabbitt says:

        lets say i go to a grocery store and i want to buy a big ol porterhouse steak but i dont have any money i go home hungry.

        i think this is how simple it should be in regards to buying and selling stock.

    23. Anonymous says:

      And to think that Pre-Deepcapture…many of us believed the mainstream media, the SEC, our politicians were just stupid in not knowing that the Milkmen and the Madoffs were running billion dollar scams in broad daylight. Now we know that they know or knew what we know now and just let it go on and on again and again and again. Only now they know that we know that they are totally corrupted and captured by power & money and not by some spirtual revelation or calling.

      As noted in Chapter 13, if only there was a pattern….

    24. Dr. Jim DeCosta says:

      Istandup, thanks for the kind words. In re: to when does a MM have to cover his naked short position by, the answer is never. Between “ex-clearing arrangements”, the NSCC’s SBP, “wash trades”, “anonymous pooling” at the NSCC and the phraseology used in UCC Article 8 a MM can keep an “open position” ad infinitum.

      The key is to focus in on this thing known as a “security entitlement”. All FTDs and SBP “borrows” result in the “issuance” of a “security entitlement” to the brokerage a/c of the purchaser of the undelivered shares. UCC-8 then FORCES the clearing firm of the purchaser to treat the purchaser who is now known as a “security entitlement holder” to exercise all of the rights and property interest that comprise the undelivered shares. It’s not “shares” that are being counterfeited in this crime wave; it is the “rights to exercise all of the rights and property interest that comprise a share” that is being “counterfeited”. But except for the “legal ownership” issues and issues related to them being technically “outstanding” or not this is for all practical purpose a “share” that is being counterfeited with each and every FTD and SBP borrow. “Security entitlements” have no legal owner and they are not technically “outstanding” as they are invisible to everybody but the SROs, NSCC participants and regulators but since they must be treated as being readily sellable as per UCC-8 they add directly to the number of legitimate shares already “outstanding” to form the “supply” variable that interacts with the “demand” variable to determine share prices through the “price discovery” process. In short, anything less than a “firm decrementing pre-borrow” represents total insanity!

    25. Dr. Jim DeCosta says:

      Istandup, the gist of it is that the “supply” variable of that which is readily sellable whether it be legitimate shares or mere “security entitlements” resulting from FTDs can be easily “custom tweaked” upwards. This causes the share price to be “custom tweaked” downwards. Since the NSCC only mandates that naked short sellers collateralize the monetary value of their naked short position on a daily marked to market basis the “custom tweaking” of the share price downwards “custom tweaks” the collateralization requirements downwards which results in the money of the purchaser of nonexistent shares unconscionably flowing to the seller of the shares that absolutely refuses to deliver that which he sold and which never existed in the first place.

    26. iStandUp says:

      Dr. Jim DeCosta,

      So Rule 204T is essential just another band-aid the SEC placed on SHO to give the mere appearance that it is doing something to stop Naked Counterfeit Short Selling.

      What I have noted with others is that Rule 204T closes this one loophole a little yet does not eliminate it. And since the SEC Lawyers acting as good Defense Lawyers for their fraternity brothers refuse to acknowledge all the other loopholes they placed in the Security Laws – “ex-clearing arrangements”, the NSCC’s SBP, “wash trades”, “anonymous pooling” – Rule 204T is just another attempt by the SEC to fool the uninformed American Citizen.

      When Rule 204T talks about the a Market Maker on T+4 “borrowing shares” , Does this mean from the SBP?

      Or borrowing REAL SHARES where they have to pay a rental fee?

    27. iStandUp says:

      Mark,

      I want to again thank you for helping us American Citizens with this 15 chapter story of how Milken and his hedge fund cronies hand of corruption has infiltrated two government regulatory agencies the FDA and the SEC.

      So it is now clear to me that all biotechnology companies potentially have Milken and his hedge fund cronies using their corrupting reach into the FDA and the SEC to harm if not destroy biotechnology companies for profit.

      I wonder if their corrupting influence into Two Separate Federal Agencies would give the FBI and/or Justice Department the right to overstep both the FDA and the SEC authority and investigate all these crimes you have revealed.

    28. Dr. Jim DeCosta says:

      Istandup, that is correct the “borrow” can be effected via the SBP on T+4. Recall that shares “borrowed” from the SBP go to the clearing firm of the purchaser of the previously undelivered shares. This firm then becomes the “legal owner” of that parcel of shares. Being the “legal owner” of those shares it has all of the right in the world to redonate them right back into that same SBP AS IF THEY NEVER LEFT IN THE FIRST PLACE. The SBP is a counterfeiting machine. It’s self-replenishing. Soon there could be 50 different “co-beneficial owners” of that one particular parcel of shares but since the NSCC insists on keeping all shares in an “anonymously pooled” format any particular parcel of shares is impossible to identify and isolate. Keep in mind that 90% of securities are held in “street name” at the DTCC. Since when does a “borrow” of shares result in the transferrence of “legal ownership”. The DTCC had to do it this way otherwise the recipient of the “borrowed” shares would have no legal right to “redonate” them back to the SBP. When you file suit against the DTCC for this blatant “counterfeiting” the SEC rides to the rescue by filing an “amicus curiae” brief stating that we approved of the SBP a couple of decades ago and we stand behind our decision. Then they ask the judge to dismiss the case and not let it go into the discovery phase.

      When you pressure the DTCC to get rid of the counterfeiting aspect of the SBP they have 3 responses. #1 we don’t have to because the SEC approved of it several decades ago. #2 we can’t change it because it’s “automated” and unable to be changed. #3 if anything were wrong with it the SEC would make us change it and they don’t seem to be too concerned. Here’s the kicker: The DTCC advertizes the SBP as “increasing the likelihood that the purchasers of shares will get a timely delivery of that which they purchased”. Sure they’re getting a form of “delivery” but what is being delivered just might happen to have 49 other invisible “co-owners”.

    29. wrister says:

      If you are suspicious of the SEC’s plans to limit naked short selling, you have good reason to be. When an agency is rotten at the top, what can you expect from the rest of the agency? For more details….
      http://www.fixit.us/main/forum/blog.php?b=10

    30. Harris Shapiro says:

      I read with interest your very factual report. I lived the ups and downs of DNDN as an investor and trader for my own acount (relatively small ) I don’t understand where steven Schonfeld fits in and why an affiliation almost twenty years ago should imply that he is involved in any massive scheme.

    31. You could definitely see your skills within the paintings you write. The world hopes for more passionate writers such as you who are not afraid to mention how they believe. Always go after your heart.

    32. cheap auto says:

      You made some good points there. I checked on the web for more info about the issue and found most individuals will go along with your views on this website.

    33. Aw, this was a really nice post. Spending some time and actual effort to create a good article… but what can I say… I hesitate a whole lot
      and never seem to get nearly anything done.

    34. My partner and I stumbled over here different web page and thought I might check things out.
      I like what I see so i am just following you.
      Look forward to finding out about your web page yet again.

    35. I don’t know if it’s just me or if perhaps everyone else experiencing problems with your blog.
      It seems like some of the written text in your posts are running off the screen.

      Can somebody else please provide feedback and let me know if this is happening to them as well?
      This might be a issue with my web browser because I’ve had this happen
      previously. Cheers

    36. It is in point of fact a nice and useful piece of information.
      I am glad that you simply shared this helpful information
      with us. Please keep us up to date like this. Thank you
      for sharing.

    37. There is definately a great deal to know about this subject.
      I like all the points you’ve made.

    38. Very good article. I will be going through a few of these issues
      as well..

    39. Hi to every body, it’s my first pay a visit of this blog; this weblog contains awesome and in fact good stuff
      designed for readers.

    40. Mollie says:

      With havin so much content and articles do you ever run into any problems of plagorism or copyright infringement? My blog has a lot of completely unique content I’ve either authored myself or outsourced but it appears a lot of it is popping it up all over the web without my authorization. Do you know any solutions to help stop content from being stolen? I’d really appreciate it.

    41. Brenda says:

      Fantastic post but I was wondering if you could write a litte more on this subject?
      I’d be very grateful if you could elaborate a little bit further.
      Appreciate it!

    42. Alfonzo says:

      Excellent blog! Do yyou have any hints for aspiring writers?
      I’m planning to start my own site soon butt I’ma little lost oon everything.
      Would you suggest starting with a free platfform like WordPress or go for a paid option? There are soo many options out
      thhere that I’m totally overwhelmed .. Any ideas? Thanks!

    Trackbacks/Pingbacks

    1. [...] Excerpt from:  Michael Milken, 60,000 Deaths, and the Story of Dendreon (Chapter 13 of 15) [...]


    Leave a Reply

    XHTML: You can use these tags: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>

    -->

    Was the United States Attacked By Financial Terrorists?
       2.The “Money Weapon” and a Jihad Bigger than Bin Laden
       3.Michael Milken and the BCCI Criminal Enterprise
       4.Michael Milken, the Mafia, and Some Powerful Hedge Funds
       5.The Russians, their Friends, and Bernie Madoff’s Bear Markets
       6.Man Financial and Al Qaeda’s Wash Trades
       7.The Bernie Madoff Cover-Up, the Blind Sheikh, and the RLevi2 Algorithmic Market Manipulation Machine
       8.Al Qaeda, Iran, and Some Mafia-tied Agents of Economic Sabotage
       9.The Collapse of MJK Clearing, a Few Loose Nukes, and a Lot of Self-Destruct CDOs
       10.The Mafia, the Markets, and a Message from Russia
       11.Michael Milken’s Market Manipulation Club and Al Qaeda’s Big Bank
       12.Russian Spies, Rogue States, and the Manipulation of the American Markets
       13.The Collapse of Refco; the Take-down of National Heritage Life; and the Day the Mafia-Jihadi Nexus Discovered Penson Financial
       14.How the Russian Mafia Captured the DTCC — and the American Financial System
       15.Ali Nazerali in Aruba, and an Al Qaeda Financial Weapon Called PTech
       16.The Deep Capture of America, and Some Clues as to the Once and Future Cataclysm
       17.A Brief Note on the Unimaginable
       18.Penson Financial’s Strange Clientele
       19.How the Mafia-Jihadi Nexus Made Penson Financial the Biggest Brokerage on the Planet
       20.Uhm, Mr. President, We Might Have a Problem…
       21.How a Small Gang of Organized Criminals Wrecked the World
    -->
    • Popular
    • Latest
    • Comments
    • Tags
    • Subscribe

    Related Sites