Sun, Jul 13, 2014, 12:43 PM EDT - U.S. Markets closed

Recent

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

Sino Clean Energy Inc Message Board

lbcb321 648 posts  |  Last Activity: Jul 11, 2014 12:37 PM Member since: Jun 4, 2010
SortNewest  |  Oldest  |  Highest Rated Expand all messages
  • Ready to cue Joe and "The Carnes Scam" I fell for? I pointed out obvious red flags in the latest 10-K and posted them here. Carnes repeated some of these along with others. So Joe... if I said them first and they are repeated by Carnes... isn't it "The lbcb321 Scam" that Carnes fell for? It really can't be just independent people seeing the exact same glaring things popping out at them in the 10-K?

    I won't bore you with the dtails. You can read it for yourselves, but I was more generous when I just stated the new 10-K was "watered-down". It is probably better described as radically changing their public disclosure of how their entire enterprise operates and how revenues are generated. It walked-back previous guidance and shows an entirely different business model than what was shown since their inception.

    When you can't verify one business model... they simply chose to portray operations as something completely different. Pretty amazing how stupid they think people are. Even more amazing they are correct as often as they are with this assessment of retail investors. Our markets are such a sham with delusional, gullible people losing their money to the manipulators.

  • Reply to

    Game over yet?

    by stanleywind Jul 6, 2014 11:43 PM
    lbcb321 lbcb321 Jul 11, 2014 10:07 AM Flag

    = Is it possible my shares in a viable company can lose all worth while the company remains viable and doing well?

    Now you're catching on. Gao owned like 49% of the outstanding shares and with the rest of the directors they control the company from a corporate governance perspective. When the SEC eventually revokes the registration, your shares still exist on the company books (US holding company and NOT the actual operating subsidiaries), but you have little chance to benefit from them. They have no more reporting requirements and you will never hear from them again.

    Can't remember where this one is chartered, but most states don't even require any notice of an annual shareholder meeting when there is a 50%+ beneficial owner. Gao only has to give himself a few shares to do this. More likely they do like SCEI and just allow the state charter to lapse. They are untouchable in China and you never owned the Chinese operating subsidiaries anyway.

    You never had a chance. That is why even Chinese companies with no allegations trade for miniscule P/Es. There is no accountability.

  • Reply to

    Wiliamszxz

    by dreamcrusher666 Jul 9, 2014 10:42 AM
    lbcb321 lbcb321 Jul 10, 2014 10:22 AM Flag

    =Up trend line still in effect.

    LMAO! You are using Technical Analysis on CBAK? That is too danged funny! Your chart doesn't tell you that their assets are gone. This is a story stock and not a multi-billion dollar market cap blue-chip you can perform TA on. The story is the assets are gone. I see you are still in denial over that fact.

    Just what do you think you still own? Once their next filing comes out, you will see all the BAK International subsidiaries removed from the consolidated statements. I am eager to see what debt carries forward. That will be the difference if they can be played as a speculative long-shot. They can maybe justify a $5M to $10M market cap for now. Less if they could not shed all of their debt and still have a significant chunk.

    Does anybody know how they were able to remove the equipment from one factory and move it to another? Hard to believe it wasn't collateralized for one of their loans. Will there be a claim made against the assets of Dalian?

    They don't meet the capital requirements to be listed on the NASDAQ Global Market anymore. How come we haven't heard of a delisting notice yet?

  • Reply to

    July 16th hearing date..

    by running2fall Jul 6, 2014 8:50 AM
    lbcb321 lbcb321 Jul 9, 2014 8:23 PM Flag

    =It's clear you know nothing about the practice of law. That much is clear.

    I know that attorneys get disbarred for filing frivolous lawsuits when they have not independently investigated to confirm there was an actionable transgression. You seem to be unwilling to verify this for some strange reason.

    =You're busted! You're an idiot and a liar

    LMAO! Mentally ill mental midget on full tilt. Getting more and more desperate. Show me how I am "busted" Show any passage from any court or the ABA showing that attorneys are allowed to file lawsuits without first confirming independently there is reasonable probability there is a legal basis.

    You and Joe (redundant?) both seem to not get this basic tenet of the responsibilities of an attorney. On another board I listed a whole bunch of disbarment orders for attorneys not independently verifying they had a case. It is amazing you speak so smugly on things yet you won't verify them. Any attorneys here want to tell truth and joe how wrong they are?

    You sure are loose with calling me a liar without ever documenting a single lie. Go ahead. Show me your documentation that attorneys can file frivolous lawsuits without independently confirming there is a legal basis. You are so sure and you have declared me a LIAR over this, so let's see your proof.

    As usual... you will fail to do so and go off on your next rant saying I have lied without backing it up. What a sick, pathetic existence you have.

  • Reply to

    July 16th hearing date..

    by running2fall Jul 6, 2014 8:50 AM
    lbcb321 lbcb321 Jul 9, 2014 8:13 PM Flag

    =Yes, you are telling lies.

    Then how come you have never documented a single lie of mine? How many times will you be called out to do so and never comply? Show my post you believe to be a lie and then provide your supporting documentation proving it is a lie. Simple. You have never once done this. All you do is make up things I supposedly said while never showing the quote.

    =I think you have also said this letter was evidence of a SEC investigation.

    That isn't what I said. You are twisting my words again.

    Sleazy just doesn't go far enough to describe you and Joe. I still have a great deal of empathy for all the good people being harmed, but it will bring a smile to my face watching conmen like you get slaughtered when this opens.

  • Reply to

    I am ready for the opening of FAB

    by qdog91111 Jul 9, 2014 6:30 PM
    lbcb321 lbcb321 Jul 9, 2014 7:29 PM Flag

    =if its opens I will buy 1000 shares and then let the dust settle

    Why do you still play that game, qdog? We have already proven with your own posts that you never sold. Good thing because you would have put proceeds into NQ. At least you are just stuck instead of losing even more. People like you should look into CDs. 1% is better than losing all your money to frauds.

  • Reply to

    July 16th hearing date..

    by running2fall Jul 6, 2014 8:50 AM
    lbcb321 lbcb321 Jul 9, 2014 7:27 PM Flag

    =IF Zhang was furious,,,why bother with 10k?

    Because Zhang isn't in control. Nobody knows just WHO is in control. The SEC forced FAB to amend their 8-K announcing change in auditors and admit they did not follow proper corporate governance and the BOD did not approve the change in auditors.

    =Why not go dark and take over the company?

    Have you heard anything from Zhang? He can take the company anytime he wants.

    =You sure speculate a lot

    Imagine that... somebody giving their opinion and speculating on a public opinion forum. What do you think these boards are for? I demarcate fact from opinion, but give my supporting material for both.

    =This is going to gap up on open.

    Another delusional one. When it was halted the last word from the company was a "vehement denial" that even the bond was issued. They have successfully defended against zero allegations while confirming the illegal bond offering and the US management is claiming they were duped and this was hidden from them. If you think this is going to gap open then I have some prime property in Iowa to sell you. It has frontage on both the Atlantic and Pacific oceans as well as mountain views.

    They are now a proven, confirmed fraud and you still believe anything they say.

    Gullible much?

  • Reply to

    July 16th hearing date..

    by running2fall Jul 6, 2014 8:50 AM
    lbcb321 lbcb321 Jul 9, 2014 7:15 PM Flag

    =That is about the stupidest thing I have read in a while. Since when are the plaintiff attorneys also the investigators.

    Why don't you actually ask an attorney... ANY attorney. If they were to file a lawsuit without first identifying they actually had an actionable offense committed, they could be disbarred. It is so hilarious that I had you nailed as a teacher or a consultant since you had no real world experience and you turned out to be BOTH!

  • lbcb321 lbcb321 Jul 9, 2014 2:49 PM Flag

    We haven't even seen the big dumping yet. Still just the small consultants getting rid of their shares in payment for services. Wonder if we see another filing this month or if Dieter and Ana realize the jig is up.

    Wonder if they file for another extension because they are so busy with production....

    How can they get away with that same line for years when they have never produced anything? Its time for investors to demand Congressional hearings and clean house at the SEC if they will not protect investors from the obvious frauds, scams and shams.

  • Reply to

    July 16th hearing date..

    by running2fall Jul 6, 2014 8:50 AM
    lbcb321 lbcb321 Jul 9, 2014 2:36 PM Flag

    =Zero out the VIE and that's what you would left (not an empty shell).

    I had already stated that just 15 hours ago:

    "What you should be concerned with is whether or not Zhang is furious his shares were not issued. He can declare the VIE agreements void on a whim and a vast majority of FAB is gone. You will be back to the original Wizzard that never made a profit."

    I CLEARLY stated that without the VIE, you would be left with the original Wizzard. You claim I am verbose, but if I don't include every nuance in every post, you are there to twist it. I had JUST stated this and thought even your mind could understand this. You are getting more pathetic with your twisting and disinformation by the day, Joe. When you say things like insurance companies don't pay out for frauds, you lose 95% of the people and are left with the truly ignorant. Of course insurance companies pay small settlements for frauds. It is cheaper than proving the fraud themselves so they don't have to pay. There isn't a person who follows these Chinese stocks that believes insurance companies don't pay for frauds. When you are caught time after time deceiving people... hopefully they learn not to trust anything from you.

  • lbcb321 lbcb321 Jul 9, 2014 2:28 PM Flag

    =The lawyers have only cut and pasted Carnes and Goinvesting's stories. They have not and will not conduct any independent investigation.

    Wow you are clueless. That would be illegal on their part and they would face disbarment. They are not permitted to file suit without their own investigative work.

    = If FAB was a fraud they'd get nothing, but because FAB is legit (with 100M in cash) they'll settle for around 2M

    LOL! You have followed enough of these to know that the settlements have nothing to do with fraud or legit. ABAT is a good example. You have admitted they are a proven fraud. Their settlement was a whopping $275K. Want to know why?

    "ABAT Defendants have represented that collectibility against the Company and the Case 1:11-cv-02279-CM Document 103 Filed 04/25/13. Individual Defendants is unlikely given that all of the ABAT Defendants and the majority of the assets are located outside of the United States, including in the People’s Republic of China."

    That is the EXACT quote from the court docs. ABAT is a proven fraud and like SCEI they remained dark after their settlements. Insurance companies come out better giving a small settlement than proving the fraud themselves so they don't need to pay out. It is merely a business decision. Civil court is not about truth and justice... it is about MONEY and you know this. To say that no insurance company pays settlements for frauds is another outright lie by you since you know better. Your target audience is the truly clueless as anybody who has followed these Chinese civil cases understands that settlements have nothing to do with guilt or innocence.

  • Ridiculous spreads on CBAK options. Can't find a good trade. AUG Puts are at Bid .15 and Ask .55. Eventually even the delusional there have to accept the BAK International assets are gone.

    Anybody see any worthwhile options there? Let me know if anything good pops up, but all the pros are licking their chops now looking for CBAK Puts and the prices just aren't there to enter and not enough liquidity to get out.

  • AUG Puts have a spread of .15 and .55. Ridiculous. Might have to just short them again.

    Do any longs want to explain just what you still own or are you still in denial all the BAK International assets are gone?

  • Reply to

    July 16th hearing date..

    by running2fall Jul 6, 2014 8:50 AM
    lbcb321 lbcb321 Jul 9, 2014 10:37 AM Flag

    =Think about it... It has to open, either on the NYSE or off of it. What other option is there?

    The SEC could determine they are a fraudulent enterprise and revoke the registration. Good luck seeing the SEC do their job, but that is another option. Zhang could be mad he didn't get his stock issuance and declare the VIE agreements to be void. Under Chinese law, he can legally do this and you will have no recourse. The assets could be gone leaving the US holding company an empty shell. That is more likely than the SEC revoking their registration but both are possible options.

  • lbcb321 lbcb321 Jul 9, 2014 10:33 AM Flag

    =I think life is poetic but also that maybe the SEC/NYSE are smarter and better regulators than we often give them credit.

    LMAO! They are advocates for the crooks and not for retail investors. Look at the leadership of both organizations... they are full of the people who are scamming the country and not investor advocates. The NYSE has been allowing Chinese frauds to continue bilking investors in exchange for "winning" more of these companies listing with them. Neither the NYSE nor the SEC is following their own rules. Proven scams, shams and frauds continue to trade.

    =I think part of the plan all along has been to halt trading in FAB

    Duh! How long have I been telling you that? This is NOT in the best interests of shareholders yet they are holding shareholder money hostage to limit their exposure to lawsuits. This lack of upholding fiduciary duty is actionable.

    =The short traders and the long traders are both stuck

    While management and the BOD are covering their own backsides. Until these charlatans are dealt with properly, nothing will change. The NYSE took their $20K bribe money and are helping FAB stall as long as possible. Retail investors are leaving the markets and computers doing high frequency trading is going to be about all that is left.

    =probably straight up to FAB's advantage.

    They have successfully defended against NOTHING. They still "vehemently denied" the bond issuance when they were halted so even that isn't built in yet. Your delusions are great. You don't hold people's money hostage for a year and then not expect them to bail at the first opportunity. Only the mentally ill like yourself will continue to defend those who harmed them and hold until zero.

  • lbcb321 lbcb321 Jul 9, 2014 10:23 AM Flag

    =your increasingly ridiculous arguments about FAB's unproven accusations being proven fraud.

    I am completely serious when I say you need to see a mental health professional and begin dealing with your losses. How can you still say the issuance of the bond is an "unproven accusation"? What is it about your delusional mind that won't allow you to see this?

    Next you can answer why the money for the building was never returned. Who received the cash in the first place? Was it a related party to Zhang? Who gives up that many millions of dollars because you may or may not be interested? What did the BOD find out that caused them to abandon this route and demand the money be returned? This just isn't how "earnest money" is handled. If they really wanted the building, you lock it up with earnest money being placed in a trust account where you know it will be returned when (if) you terminate the offer. The fact they asked for the money back in early December (at least) and it hasn't been returned by June (at least) indicates another huge red flag. Even if money is shuffled around and they claim it was returned, so much time has gone by that there is something improper going on. The investigation needs to answer the questions about who received the money, who the related parties are and why the money was not immediately returned.

  • lbcb321 lbcb321 Jul 8, 2014 11:36 PM Flag

    =LBCB keeps repeating it....even posting it's OK to call the bond illegal because Carnes said so (never mind it's been 7 months and no one is investigating anything except for FAB investigating themselves).

    More lies and misrepresentations from conman Joe. Read the complaints. It is ATTORNEYS and not Carnes that are calling the bond offering illegal and they cite the statutes violated. You understand it is illegal so why are you trying to deceive people?

    I'll bet 90% of your posts reference a "Carnes Scam" when you were shown his reports knocked the price per share down about 25 cents. That really makes you look stupid and desperate. Did Carnes issue the bonds? What a pathetic lowlife you are to con good people. First they get taken by a fraud and then you prey on their emotions to get them blaming everybody for their losses except those who perpetrated crimes.

    = it's been 7 months and no one is investigating anything except for FAB investigating themselves

    Yet another lie from Joe. He knows there are multiple lawsuits going through the courts that will have a discovery process. He also knows that the SEC does not publicly acknowledge ongoing investigations. Send them a FOIA request and I can pretty much guarantee you that they will refuse to provide anything which indicates an investigation is ongoing.

    You can con the ignorant, Joe, but to those who know how these things work... your posts are a major disinformation campaign. Blame it all on Carnes and nothing to see here, folks... move along. There were crimes committed and there is a huge civil liability. Your conning others so you can get out with only an 80% loss instead of 100% loss is more pathetic than anything Carnes ever did. IMO... you are both sleazy.

  • lbcb321 lbcb321 Jul 8, 2014 11:17 PM Flag

    =Plus don't even think of saying the bond in China is evidence of fraud.

    OMG! What a BUFFOON! It is per se fraud. There is no excuse for it. There is not a scenario where it can be argued NOT to be fraud. It was REQUIRED to be disclosed and it was not. It isn't "evidence of fraud"... it IS FRAUD.

    = I see you do not even attempt to explain how FAB apparently has $100M cash on hand.

    It is irrelevant. Once you get caught committing fraud... nothing else is to be believed. How did they make the revenue without the kiosks? Show me the kiosk locations and I will determine if cash is believable. What you should be concerned with is whether or not Zhang is furious his shares were not issued. He can declare the VIE agreements void on a whim and a vast majority of FAB is gone. You will be back to the original Wizzard that never made a profit.

    Why do you defend those who harmed you while attacking those who just exposed and reported on their actions? It really is amazing.

  • lbcb321 lbcb321 Jul 8, 2014 11:08 PM Flag

    =Explain yourself in concrete language (not terms like watered down), or you will be known here as the hypocrite.

    You are too delusional to accept what is already PROVEN.

    They illegally issued bonds and hid it from the public. Not "improperly", but ILLEGALLY. Read the complaints and you will see the exact statutes that were violated. Intentionally failing to disclose such material information is fraud... pure and simple. What don't you understand about that FACT? It was confirmed... PERIOD. It is not an allegation. In what alternate reality do you exist where illegally failing to disclose such important material information is not fraud?

    =Yet it is not proven and confirmed that FAB is a fraud.

    It IS proven and confirmed that FAB is a fraud. Furthermore, if it can be proven Spencer had received the proof of the existence of the bond before issuing a PR "vehemently denying" its existence... this ups the ante to not just a lone fraudulent act; rather, it becomes a fraudulent scheme. What don't you understand about the bond being hidden as per se fraud? Are you saying that Zhang had no idea that something like this needed to be disclosed on the books?

    Gullible much?

  • lbcb321 lbcb321 Jul 8, 2014 7:35 PM Flag

    =If you run a fraud the cash either has to be fake or raised from a secondary. By definition it cannot exist (frauds don't make cash, they steal it).

    More nonsense from your black and white world. Enron was a fraud and they had plenty of cash. WorldCom, Tyco, HealthSouth etc. all the same. Fraud means a MISREPRESENTATION of your true financial picture and operations. This puts FAB in the category of a fraud. They were caught misrepresenting their financial picture by hiding a bond offering. They misrepresented their deployed kiosk count and the fact they had pirated content on their kiosks in order to make them more attractive.

    To say any fraud must have zero cash and zero operations to mix in with their made up operations is pure nonsense. First you try to con people with "Carnes is bad so FAB must be good" when the truth is they are BOTH bad and one is irrelevant to the other. Now it is "FAB can't be a fraud because they aren't a 100% fraud." Do we really care if they are a 40% fraud or 60% fraud or whatever it may be? They are a proven fraud that misrepresented their true financial position. That is all it takes for their credibility to be shot. The delusional can play their games with semantics, but to any objective observer they are no longer an investment vehicle. They may be good for a trade long or short ala NQ, but they are not investment grade.

    I have no problem with anybody that wants to make a speculative gamble. What I have a problem with is those who lie and deceive to con others into thinking this is something it isn't. It is a fraud. It is a proven, confirmed fraud. Admit your transgressions, promise to do better in the future and all can be forgiven in time. Issue a "vehement denial" when you have proof and you are criminals and should be prosecuted under RICO laws as a corrupt organization.

SCEI
0.24+0.04(+20.00%)Jul 11 3:00 PMEDT

Trending Tickers

i
Trending Tickers features significant U.S. stocks showing the most dramatic increase in user interest in Yahoo Finance in the previous hour over historic norms. The list is limited to those equities which trade at least 100,000 shares on an average day and have a market cap of more than $300 million.
Turtle Beach Corporation
NasdaqGMFri, Jul 11, 2014 4:00 PM EDT