Comments on: Michael Milken, 60,000 Deaths, and the Story of Dendreon (Chapter 13 of 15) http://www.deepcapture.com/michael-milken-60000-deaths-and-the-story-of-dendreon-chapter-13-of-15/ Independent investigations into illegal naked short selling. Sun, 01 Aug 2010 08:11:16 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.1 hourly 1 By: Bob Zumbrunnen http://www.deepcapture.com/michael-milken-60000-deaths-and-the-story-of-dendreon-chapter-13-of-15/comment-page-1/#comment-173195 Bob Zumbrunnen Tue, 08 Dec 2009 04:14:33 +0000 http://www.deepcapture.com/?p=944#comment-173195 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) 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)

]]> By: Harris Shapiro http://www.deepcapture.com/michael-milken-60000-deaths-and-the-story-of-dendreon-chapter-13-of-15/comment-page-1/#comment-170805 Harris Shapiro Sun, 16 Aug 2009 22:19:48 +0000 http://www.deepcapture.com/?p=944#comment-170805 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. 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.

]]> By: wrister http://www.deepcapture.com/michael-milken-60000-deaths-and-the-story-of-dendreon-chapter-13-of-15/comment-page-1/#comment-170620 wrister Tue, 04 Aug 2009 20:33:35 +0000 http://www.deepcapture.com/?p=944#comment-170620 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 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

]]> By: Michael Milken, 60,000 Deaths, and the Story of Dendreon (Chapter 14 of 15) | Deep Capture: exposing the crime of naked short selling http://www.deepcapture.com/michael-milken-60000-deaths-and-the-story-of-dendreon-chapter-13-of-15/comment-page-1/#comment-170530 Michael Milken, 60,000 Deaths, and the Story of Dendreon (Chapter 14 of 15) | Deep Capture: exposing the crime of naked short selling Tue, 28 Jul 2009 16:10:51 +0000 http://www.deepcapture.com/?p=944#comment-170530 [...] Click here to read PART 13 [...] [...] Click here to read PART 13 [...]

]]> By: Marv Eatinger http://www.deepcapture.com/michael-milken-60000-deaths-and-the-story-of-dendreon-chapter-13-of-15/comment-page-1/#comment-170336 Marv Eatinger Wed, 22 Jul 2009 23:31:56 +0000 http://www.deepcapture.com/?p=944#comment-170336 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 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 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. 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.

]]> By: Dr. Jim DeCosta http://www.deepcapture.com/michael-milken-60000-deaths-and-the-story-of-dendreon-chapter-13-of-15/comment-page-1/#comment-170334 Dr. Jim DeCosta Wed, 22 Jul 2009 15:57:18 +0000 http://www.deepcapture.com/?p=944#comment-170334 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". 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”.

]]> By: iStandUp http://www.deepcapture.com/michael-milken-60000-deaths-and-the-story-of-dendreon-chapter-13-of-15/comment-page-1/#comment-170333 iStandUp Wed, 22 Jul 2009 15:07:15 +0000 http://www.deepcapture.com/?p=944#comment-170333 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. 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.

]]> By: iStandUp http://www.deepcapture.com/michael-milken-60000-deaths-and-the-story-of-dendreon-chapter-13-of-15/comment-page-1/#comment-170332 iStandUp Wed, 22 Jul 2009 14:54:52 +0000 http://www.deepcapture.com/?p=944#comment-170332 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? 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?

]]> By: Dr. Jim DeCosta http://www.deepcapture.com/michael-milken-60000-deaths-and-the-story-of-dendreon-chapter-13-of-15/comment-page-1/#comment-170331 Dr. Jim DeCosta Wed, 22 Jul 2009 14:35:24 +0000 http://www.deepcapture.com/?p=944#comment-170331 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. 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.

]]> By: Dr. Jim DeCosta http://www.deepcapture.com/michael-milken-60000-deaths-and-the-story-of-dendreon-chapter-13-of-15/comment-page-1/#comment-170330 Dr. Jim DeCosta Wed, 22 Jul 2009 14:23:45 +0000 http://www.deepcapture.com/?p=944#comment-170330 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! 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!

]]> By: Anonymous http://www.deepcapture.com/michael-milken-60000-deaths-and-the-story-of-dendreon-chapter-13-of-15/comment-page-1/#comment-170329 Anonymous Wed, 22 Jul 2009 03:05:15 +0000 http://www.deepcapture.com/?p=944#comment-170329 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…. 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….

]]> By: harveydawabbitt http://www.deepcapture.com/michael-milken-60000-deaths-and-the-story-of-dendreon-chapter-13-of-15/comment-page-1/#comment-170328 harveydawabbitt Wed, 22 Jul 2009 00:37:07 +0000 http://www.deepcapture.com/?p=944#comment-170328 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. 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.

]]> By: iStandUp http://www.deepcapture.com/michael-milken-60000-deaths-and-the-story-of-dendreon-chapter-13-of-15/comment-page-1/#comment-170326 iStandUp Tue, 21 Jul 2009 19:13:12 +0000 http://www.deepcapture.com/?p=944#comment-170326 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. 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.

]]> By: Fred http://www.deepcapture.com/michael-milken-60000-deaths-and-the-story-of-dendreon-chapter-13-of-15/comment-page-1/#comment-170325 Fred Tue, 21 Jul 2009 18:32:43 +0000 http://www.deepcapture.com/?p=944#comment-170325 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/ 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/

]]> By: sean http://www.deepcapture.com/michael-milken-60000-deaths-and-the-story-of-dendreon-chapter-13-of-15/comment-page-1/#comment-170324 sean Tue, 21 Jul 2009 18:07:03 +0000 http://www.deepcapture.com/?p=944#comment-170324 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." 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.”

]]>