The words of wisdom below from h_grant_h actually made me laugh.
"The so-called Cassidy LE should really only be viewed as a pricing reference to investors who were interested in buying the fractionals. All serious investors should have consulted different sources for the LEs in question before they committed to an investment"
Can someone translate them for me and more importantly, tell me how a fractional investor could possible get access to "different sources for the LEs in question". I suppose they could just call AVS, 21st or Fasano and ask for the LEs or maybe they could ask LPHI what other LEs they have. I am certain LPHI would share the fact that they have 2 other LEs that are significantly longer than the Cassidy LE. Maybe they could ask their advisor, who is undoubtedly looking out for their best interest, what the other LEs are. Many options. Unfortunately none of them work. What does "pricing reference" mean anyway?
I know you are ignoring me h_grant_h but I am embarrassed for you making such a stupid statement. Am I alone?
Cynic, we've seen him here before under another ID. It must be grasshoppa, morhpheushelmfire, pamelamoore or some other Scott and Kurt ID racket. He has gone from ignoring us all to responding to everything and has now become a scholar of Life Settlement litigation with a Degree from the University of Google.
I'll give him one thing, TSSB got tossed on it's #$%$, but Jackson rested before calling her witnesses, and the judge refused to open the case to be reheard. I don't blame him, besides Tx hasn't enacted any new laws to cover items now in play at LPHI. Can't tell if AG appealed but if they don't go for the DPTA, then in my opinion, the fix is on. But you can't make law through litigation.....
LPHI can't survive off of just sucking in every gullible Texans, even though there may be a ton of them to go for, even they can fog stainless steel and see something amiss.
We all know what we know. The most important thing in Texas is your reputation, and LPI's has been stomped into the cow pies.
Not at all. I think that seems to be a chronic problem with our friend. Fortunately, there is available documentation to set the record straight.
Just to check my facts, I read the July 5, 1996 Fiften Circuit Opinion, which h_grant_h cites says ruled that LPHI fractional investments were not fraudulent. The entire 21 page opinion is devoted to the determination of whether the fractional investments are a security, most of which revolved around the discussion of the application of the Howey test to the fractional investments. Anyone can google it and check for themselves (SEC v. LPI & Pardo, No. 94cv01861).
The only part of the opinion that even remotely references fraud is "the SEC could produce no evidence of or even allegations that any investor, terminally ill patient or insurancce company has been defrauded, misled, or is any way dissatisfied with an LPI viatical settlement."
The opinion also notes that "The Commission, however, points out that the securities laws, and in particular the disclosure requirements of the 1933 and 1934 Acts, are intended to prevent abuses before they arise."
In 1996, LPHI had been in business about four years and was buying viaticals before the AIDS cocktails showed up and a two year life expectancy was reasonable. Then, along came the AIDS cocktails, which significantly extended the AIDS life expectancies, and blew up the LPI business model. The fractionals are still making premium calls on these worthless policies.
Once the viatical model blew up, the company moved into the life settlement areana (see my earlier post) in about 2004 / 2005, which is when many of the fraudulent practices noted in the Colorado lawsuit against Life Partners began. These practices included post purchase ministerial duties that did not exist in 1996, when the Fifth Circuit ruled, including premium advances and policy resales. Not to mention the arrival of the Dr. Cassidy, the best friend of fractional investors.
Perhaps h-grant-h should go to Section III of the Opinion (Summary and Conclusion) and point out what part of the opinion deals with fraud. But why be constrained by the facts when you can ignore them and create your own reality.
How unfortunate for h_grant_h and LPHI that the rest of the world is grounded in reality.
If it were not, LPHI would be trading at $20 per share or more, the 19.9% interest in the Life Asset Trust would really be worth more than $100 million, sales of fractional shares have continued ot grow because investors really were only relying on the Cassidy LE as a "pricing reference", the licensee network would still be in tact, LPHI would be now listed on the NYSE, the underfunded premium escrows would be under control and fractional investors would be enjoying "double digit" returns. Makes for a nice story, though. People bought it for a while, but no more.
"The entire 21 page opinion is devoted to the determination of whether the fractional investments are a security, ..."
lonesome, only if you would stop lying, it would probably help your course.
Fortunately, most people can read themselves, and they don't need someone like you to tell them what and how to think, when in fact that you failed at being honest and you're suffering from being too emotional.
Hey, like I said it a few times already, TX AG was thrown out by the court, and that was nearly a two-month old case! The only reason I quoted the relevant rulings from the Fifth Circuit was to use those as a reminder to new traders/investors of the stock that only the truth matters in the court.
What would it take for you to be both honest AND smart enough not to be so emotionally attached to your huge losses?
You want to buy back under $1. I don't think you're good enough to have shorted this stock from the top. That's the ugly truth, isn't it?!