The paperwork will be sent in after march 15. It's game on. As you all know, I want the BOD replaced and effectively new management. I never believed that the darkness was because of the lawsuit. I believed the lawsuit gave an excuse to be dark.
I agree with TwistNRev: My advice is to support ABAT through to conclusion of legal action.
Why is TwistNRev right? If you were CEO of a company and a shareholder demanded a meeting, what would you as CEO do? Most CEO's would stay their course, postpone the shareholder meeting indefinitely,. Further, it would most likely irritate the CEO and make him or her less likely to look favorably upon that shareholder(s).
Have you not read that China's CSRC and the U.S.'s SEC have very significant diplomatic tension between them at present? What Chinese or any other country's company/BOD/CEO would step out of line when their COUNTRY is attempting a diplomatic solution? You are essentially asking a Chinese company to break with all the rest of their Country.
IMHO you are only increasing tensions and not opening a solution path. It is no wonder whatsoever that LBCB, a bona-fide anti-China basher supports your endeavor.
=If you were CEO of a company and a shareholder demanded a meeting, what would you as CEO do?
LMAO! Gee, if I were CEO I would make sure my company stayed in compliance with all regulatory obligations. The BOD has the duty to replace any CEO that does not fulfill his obligations to the detriment of shareholders. The only reason they haven't been sued for more recent acts is that it requires the shares trade on an "efficient" market. The Pinks don't qualify. You basically lose your right to sue them once they go to the Pinks. You can try, but the cases get thrown out.
It is Delaware Law that gives shareholders the right to force a company to fulfill its obligations. This is the exact situation the law exists for.
=It is no wonder whatsoever that LBCB, a bona-fide anti-China basher supports your endeavor.
Does it really make you feel better to make up lies about me to rationalize your own failures? I'm not anti-China... I'm anti-fraudulent companies. Beacon Power was an outright fraud out of Massachusetts. I proved the CEO was lying about many things. He continued to lie right through their BK proceedings and taxpayers were defrauded out of money. Their shareholders got wiped out. I stated exactly why this would happen and got treated the same on their board by the delusional. Ener1 was a US company stolen by a Russian. I documented exactly what would happen there and got the same treatment as from you guys. This ain't my first rodeo. My past has clearly shown I don't pick on just Chinese stocks. This just happens to be a fraud that realdutch kept asking me to look at.
You are a fool to invest in ANY company that goes dark for years... being out of China just happens to amplify the problems as you have limited recourse in the courts if they don't have US assets to attach.
Good point... The big picture is a significant factor. Word from PACER (Public Access to Court Electronic Records) states The Honorable Judge Colleen McMahon has placed a stay (hold) on proceedings. This is pending her review of a "settlement-in-principle".
It is evident short activity is not on hold here on this message board.
Good for you, Jim. I strongly believe your window of opportunity to take back your company closes when the lawsuit is settled. That is when they can cut out US shareholders and start the clock to list in China. A judgment or unresolved legal issues would probably keep them from listing on a major Chinese exchange in the future.
It is time Foo quit stalling to cover his own backside and began looking out for shareholders. As I said before, the more time that goes by... the less likely the judge is going to approve a settlement that does not fairly compensate the affected class. Pomerantz and the other firms don't care about justice. They advise their clients on how to maximize what they can actually receive. A token settlement in hand is to them better than a large judgment that can never be collected. The judge isn't concerned about that and looks for justice, but will USUALLY ultimately rule on what the Plaintiffs ask for. I have seen judges; however, deny approving settlements that are based only on financial prudency and not fair compensation based on actual damages. This is going from a near sure settlement to being up in the air quickly.
Good luck to all shareholders. I have always supported you and only had problems with those who lie and misrepresent things to con others into this on false pretenses. If the BOD were controlled by independent, qualified members I might even throw some money into this after seeing audited financials. At this point, it is much more likely that shareholders get wiped out or they have taken on so much debt as to make the shares worth next to nothing.
" I strongly believe your window of opportunity to take back your company closes when the lawsuit is settled."
The opportunity for SHORTS to continue to damage ABAT closes when legal action is settled. There is no class action as it was never certified. And ABAT counsel is a day closer to shedding Pomerantz off the back of ABAT.
ABAT produces high demand products for worldwide distribution and is displaying product at the Canton Fair. It has been many months of effort to recover from the V V R self confessed short attack of 03/2011. My advice is to support ABAT through to conclusion of legal action.
F(u) is a loser. He is getting pummeled by anonymous bloggers. He will get pummeled by his own shareholders. He is probably getting pummeled by his own wife. I have no problem with replacing him.
All shareholders prior to VVR who got themselves reamed in the rear, please to call the Pomerantz and tell them your pain by their lawsuit. They have hurt shareprice more than VVR. They pretend to care about shareholders but really the do not.