% | $
Quotes you view appear here for quick access.


  • Mike again i will say the same thing i have always said to you. I dont agree or disagree with your comments, i question your motive, and till this day you have not responded on what your motive is. I dont believe you are a shareholder nor do i think you want this company to succeed. You have some personnel agenda and it has become more obvious than ever.

    Just tell us why you are so involved in this stock that makes you some emphatic on your posts. Maybe then we can understand why you hate everyone involved with idgg
    And dont give me the same old you care speech and that you are an investor and you want to help us all out. Nobody believes it.

    SortNewest  |  Oldest  |  Most Replied Expand all replies
    • miketraynor Dec 10, 2009 9:55 AM Flag

      I took a long time to respond to you. Have you no comment?

    • miketraynor Dec 8, 2009 6:08 PM Flag

      I could get past it all if I thought that management was working for the shareholders. BUT THEY ARE NOT.

      LOOK AT DURDIN'S COMMENTS TO ME. He stated that he took the CEO job to salvage an investment he had made. HE TOOK THE JOB TO PROTECT HIS OWN INVESTMENT.

      Do you realize what that means???? It means that his interests are different from the shareholders. It means that he is looking at his pocketbook--why else would he comment on it so much?

      He is trying to rescue his investment--well he took a pretty big step with those 20,000,000 shares. Nobody is granting me 60,000 more shares to "rescue" my investment. Nobody is giving you, Molly, extra shares to rescue your investment.

      I'll give you two quotes. The surest way to failure is to keep doing the same thing and expecting different results.

      Second: Whatever should be done eventually must be done now.

      So, to sum this up . . . I am a shareholder. Management is incompetent. Should I just let them continue running my investment into the ground, or should I speak up?

      OK. I have to get back to work. These 60,000 shares are not worth the grief.

      You know, Molly, people pay me well for my opinions. I know that does not mean anything to anyone on this board. But, I have something in me that wants to teach others--and I have offered my findings here. I am amazed so many people react so violently. And I am amazed that so many people ignore the facts in front of them. This stock is under 2 cents, and people are blaming me. I just don't get that.

    • miketraynor Dec 8, 2009 5:59 PM Flag

      So I posted my information about the loan--and back then was roundly criticized by people on this board. The deal went bad and the company lost $400K.

      Then, David called me and asked me what I thought of the company. I told him that it was a huge gamble. He told me he owned 10,000 shares, because he thought the company leaders were capable of pumping and dumping--just look at the press release on the $686 million--and that I could make a few bucks trading. I don't have time for that, so I ignored it.

      Then, Miller comes along. At that time, it looks like the company has a shot. At the time, I called it a hail Mary--football term. Later, I called it a long term option on a lottery ticket--which it is today.

      Problem is, I have owned 60,000 shares (did own more, but sold some) for over a year, and that long term option has turned into an ownership position.

      So, over this year, I have looked in to the company, and what I find is incompetence. Not being mean, just objective. I mean, do you really think that my posting has taken the company under 2 cents or has inept management taken it under 2 cents?

      When I read the interview, it confirmed what I already knew. Nothing on production or plans--just cheerleading and not good cheerleading at that.

      Then, his response to my post--saying he is working for free????? THAT IS IN DIRECT CONTRADICTION TO THE SEC FILINGS. He did that to gain sympathy. If you don't like the pay, then quit.

      I work very hard and long hours for my money. It disturbs me to see a guy making 6 figures while his stock is down 90%. It disturbs me even more for this company to grant 20,000,000 shares (not options, mind you, these are grants) which is akin to a cash payment.

    • miketraynor Dec 8, 2009 5:51 PM Flag


      Some of this will cover old ground, but you did ask. I represent a client who received a proposal from a group to finance one of his real estate deals. A guy at this company: told me that his funding source was BJ Petro, and he further told me that BJ was funding IDGG.

      I also was put in contact with another guy (call him David--not real name) who was doing due diligence on BJ. David told me he had contacted Stan Teeple and Steve Durdin requesting a copy of the BJ Petro contract (half if it was in an SEC filing). David said that the comapny DIDN"T HAVE THE REST OF THE CONTRACT--just the half in the SEC document. David thought this to be crazy.

      Not to belabor that, you know the rest.

      My first post was to ask about this deal and see if anyone knew about it. Durdin and Teeple believe it to be the best deal since sliced bread--they thought it was going to be a windfall. David and I were on the phone to them once and David pointed out that BJ Petro was located in a house that was appraised at $180K or less (I don't remember) and that their coroprate registration had expired. David and I also spoke to the lady at BJ Petro who was totally unversed in the language of finance. We spotted her right off.

      When we offered to share information with the company, they asked us NOT TO GIVE THEM our information--we wanted to share information. I had an obligation to my client to do this investigation, and I was willing to open my files, if the company would talk.

      AT THE SAME TIME, the Company put out a press release touting the $686 million loan--without any caveat about the deal.

      I could not believe this.