Here's my take after just reading the materials from Geo and the LLEN press releases on this "whistle-blower" matter. First, a disclosure, I'm a long shareholder and an attorney who has and is in-house for public companies (in very different industries) who have to comply with SEC filings and Sarbanes-Ox regulations.
LLEN is doing the right moves in response to the Geo allegations. I have no idea is Geo is right or not and Lee and Fong are crooks running a scam company or not. Nor should we (as public shareholders) make a judgment with regard to the Geo allegations. We don't have the evidence. The Geo allegations were full of hearsay evidence, inherently unreliable. Let's avoid jumping to conclusions as to who is right or wrong. But the allegations are extremely serious.
The correct move is to have the independent directors of the Board investigate, with complete access, and have chosen independent outside counsel to do this investigation. I'm familiar with the law firm and it is well-regarded locally. I also met and spoke with the independent directors on Monday at the reception (and I did not speak with Lee or Fong). Here is where it is important to have independent directors who owe a fiduciary duty to the shareholders, the public shareholders.
But Geo bothers me. Geo is not a whistle-blower and is not entitled to any protections as a whistle-blower under Sarb-Ox provisions. In fact, if there should be an SEC or DoJ investigation of this matter, it should be against Geo and all of the entities who traded having material non-public information. The Geo investigation has been happening for months, if not over a year. It has been non-public until Thursday morning (although for me it was Friday morning since I was off-the-grid). In view of what happened to the stock price on Thursday, the information is "material". Yet there were all kinds of illegal insider trading activity by Geo and those in communication with Geo. .. continued
You cannot say GEO is not working for shareholders, as they exposed Toups and the LPH scam, and umbi and Unemon were on that mess board quipping the same song before this hit.. it was identical, LPH delisted and at .06, cannot disprove any of the allegations to date.... I believe they would not have chosen a well run company with Ethics, to attack. I cannot even trade this, as the independent board could find wrong doing and WILL need to bring it to light or face prosecution and a whopping 10k fine....their will be not justice.
I would say GEO is not solely working for the interest and benefits of shareholders; otherwise, they would have contacted LLEN's management and sought for clarification before drawing any final conclusion. Yet they are using their rough findings with clear motive of reaping profit at the costs of SHAREHOLDERS! What do you say?
The #$%$ plaintiff lawyers who are "investigating" LLEN need to act on the interests of us, the public shareholders, and investigate Geo and the illegal insider trading activity on non-public material information (that is, the Geo allegations of illegal conduct by LLEN management Lee and Fong). If there is a shareholder lawsuit filed, it needs to be against Geo and all those who profited from illegal insider trading.
LLEN did the right thing and has the independent directors investigating the allegations. Geo, if it really is a whistle-blower, needed to inform LLEN's Board of the allegations BEFORE trading on this information and going public with it.
Again, we (public shareholders) do not know if the allegations have any truth to them. But we do know that Geo has engaged in illegal insider trading and for that the full weight of both a shareholder lawsuit and the federal criminal justice system needs to come into play.
If Fong and Lee have falsified a Ponzi scheme, as the Geo allegations imply, the full weight of the criminal justice system needs to come down on them. The Boards independent investigation will be the first step. But at this point in time, it is Geo who has, in my opinion, committed illegal acts of insider trading and needs to disgorge their profits (to us the losing shareholders) and be fined severely.
"But we do know that Geo has engaged in illegal insider trading and for that the full weight of both a shareholder lawsuit and the federal criminal justice system needs to come into play."
I think you need to look up the definition of insider trading. Unless someone "inside" LLEN gave GEO information and both profited from that information, there is no insider trading. GEO obtained all their information, whether it's true or false, without the help of anyone working for LLEN as far as we know. Unless you know who was involved on the inside of the company in giving GEO anything that's not public knowledge, or restricted knowledge about company operations, I wouldn't use that term.
you are not a lawyer .... you are a fraudster .... if you were a lawyer, you would know Geos team is far away from any insider source .... speaking about insider trading is a joke ..... a lawyer would not support such a baby thesis .... they are close to on-the-ground facts, not to fraudsters .... any of you could have taken a flight to china and trade on those findings .... you are lucky Geo gave you a chance to sell .... but apparently most of you dont want to sell .... let me add .... stupidly .... this fraud will trade in pennies in jan 2014
It's not insider trading to use public information that other investors are too lazy or do t have the financial resources to figure out. Nice try but what they did is what every investor should do
well said... something REAL needs to be done to GEO and there likes--i am assuming llen is legit and geo is the fraud--so this sort of thing stops occuring. geo steals from fearful investors by way of lying and illegal tactics.
Are you absolutely certain geo's trading would be considered insider trading? If, for a simple example, I go to Kmart, find their business to be slow, short the stock and then tell others I did, that would not be insider trading would it?
Well said. That's why I believe GEO is unlikely to file anything to NASAQ or SEC to avoid queries for data or information regarding shoring activities on part of GEO and its associates, as well as specific details (time, place, content, methodology ...) of interviews with government officials, people, agents, etc...