You may be right about Ji not getting his shares stripped. However, you never know exactly what the delay and the PRC court action process will deliver. If it were simply a matter of arbitrating the note difference in accord with the loan agreement, that would have been long since passed. There is something else going on here. Sarbanes-Oxley (U.S. Law) stipulates that the CEO, Ji, this case is financially responsible for mis statement of the financial position. That law was in force when the litigated infraction took place. In CIA terminology that is a slam-dunk. Question is how to effect this.... and indeed will the current Directorate?
hope for this co. First, the board nullifies the outstanding stock of Quinan Ji (sin 3m shares). Then the two class action plaintiff sheista groups are offered the 3 m shares full settlement. Then the current management places a takeout IPO in Shenzen that provides 30 million shares offer at $10 per share. Takeout of the current shares at $8 per share and they never look back. Simple enough, eh? (It was Quinan Ji who lied personally about related transactions... it is he who has to pay, personally, for the problems that resulted)
"rbtsherman • May 30, 2013 12:35 PM Flag
0 users liked this posts users disliked this posts 2
he could not raise than and probably not now It will be a national company that buys out"
There is no market for this stock. It is undervalued because no entity or fund has provisions that will allow investment in a BK Twice class-actined company. Sounds logical, eh? Accordingly there is nothing to be "earned" here, this is a speculation by you me an others that the restructure will be on the side of the shareholder. I think it will. Look at that nit-wit rbt, he predicted a national would buy out in the fall. With optimism like that you know something is up. But... do not kid yourself, from this point, it is all speculation. (You've heard of the market place.... well, it is all propaganda. It is all fixed and manipulated)
yet you rbt, believe 100% that the solution to strenuously short term of the loan was an extension or modification of maturity date. Right? Is that Don Yang figured such a moron about arithmetic that he cannot understand this? Rbt, you could have advised the boy. Maybe he did not learn arithmetic when he was in school, eh? What do you think?
100% ltv, purchase price $300K. Rbt defaults on loan and finds out that there was a provision in note that provides for the balance now to become $450K. Rbt cannot now pay. He finds an attorney who claims usury and eventually wins.
It may well be, that the warrants, cum prepayment penalty prove to be illegal in the PRC. The warrants are for upward moves in price value. Hard to imagine the warrants as a default penalty. Makes no sense from a logical standpoint and appears abusive from the standpoint of Abax and Fast-money Don Yang. (this is my guess about what the loan dispute is about)
There is one thing that is not yet entirely flushed and that is this: margin CNG 81%, margin LNG 18%. When the LNG margins make their way to 81%, forexmple, $4m net income added in the past quarter. This, to people that pay attention, makes this appear to be a greater potential. The lawsuits, I'll admit, add some complication.
You really should start thing a little more constructively.
I mean what is new about scheistas and heistas in this country.
Give me a number, what do you think the company is worth?
from report: "
Pursuant to section 1121 of the Bankruptcy Code, as a debtor-in-possession, the Company has an "exclusive period" of 120 days from the date of entry of the Order for Relief (the "exclusivity period’) within which only the Company may file a plan of reorganization or liquidation, and thereafter solicit votes for acceptance or rejection of the plan. Because the Company’s efforts to develop a plan to emerge from bankruptcy are ongoing, the Company filed a timely motion to extend its exclusivity period, which is scheduled to be heard by the Bankruptcy Court on November 13, 2013. The Company has also filed a standard motion to set a "bar date" by which all creditors must file a proof of claim against CNG or be forever barred from doing so (the "Bar Date Motion"). The Bar Date Motion is also scheduled to be heard by the Bankruptcy Court on November 13, 2013."
"Statoil is a partner in the OMV-operated Wisting Central oil discovery in the Hoop area. This represents a new oil play in the Norwegian Barents Sea.
"Statoil is very pleased with the discovery in the Wisting Central well. This is the first well drilled in the frontier Hoop area. It gives us valuable geological information and demonstrates that the Hoop area has an exciting oil potential," says Gro Haatvedt, Statoil senior vice president for exploration Norway.
Gro Haatvedt, Statoil senior vice president for exploration Norway.
Statoil plans to drill two operated wells in the same area in 2014—the Atlantis and Apollo prospects in PL615 situated approximately 50 kilometres north of PL537.
"The oil discovery in Wisting Central is encouraging for our upcoming drilling operations in the Hoop area. In the Apollo prospect we will actually target the same geological formation as in the Wisting Central well," says Haatvedt."
that court proceedings would take such a long time. I mean a prommisorry note is in black and white and attorneys are a wasteful bunch of parasites. What seems to be the problem?
"A “plenum” is a meeting of the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) leadership. This meeting, to be held in November, is the third plenary session in the five-year cycle of party leadership meetings launched at the high-profile November 2012 CCP Congress."
A big meeting for finance matters as here they will decide on foreign exchange convertabiity.
It is worth watching and reading about.
this morning 1500 shares traded at $0.58 and then 100 shares sold at $0.52. Why on earth would a self-interested capitalist sell at $0.52 right after a relatively large interest at $0.58? Is there some childish game by the mentally challenged boxco poster? Or is there some other appearance agenda here?
rbt, You sound awfully like a Yang shill! Are you? If you paid any attention to what is going on, you would know that the loan balance has been disputed by CHNG, Inc. Terms of the note required that Arbitration take place upon dispute. Do you, rbt, believe in the terms of the note as a binding contract? It was CHNG Board Member Don Yang who accelerated the note causing the default, when even people like you are in 100% agreement (eh?) that extension of terms would have solved the entire payment problem. What is it about basic arithmetic that is so complicated for Don Yang and you?
are ostensibly held by Americans. An owner of greater than 10% of shares must register with the SEC. The question looms over the past several years: Who is it that currently owns that 18.5 mil shares with a market value of $0.50 or so per share? My guess is that the ownership is concentrated with effected bad news to keep shares at very low market value. In my books, Yang is a bad actor and all of this has been preconceived. I think that we are not too far off from finding out.
The co is chrtered Delaware. I am not aware of any restriction from acquiring a simple majority of shares and showing up at the Annual Board Meeting to place Directors of ownership choice. Two problems surface. We have never received notice of Annual Board Meeting nor have we ever been allowed to vote for Directors. (SEC is still at Fenway trying to locate First Base). The obvious problem are the VIE in the PRC, the subsidiaries if you will. What legal authority of ownership would be recognized in PRC? Not known at this point... at least by me. It has seemed to me for a long time like an obvious target for the likes of Mitt Romney and the Bain Kapital Group, corporate raiders that they are.
rbt, as you have agreed, the solution was academic: an extension of terms. The company has demonstrated positive income and positive cash flow since the inception of the loan except for Q3 of 2012 which was a charge-off of obsolete equipment and maintenance period for nonporduction.
What is so so complicated about that for you, rbt?
" Instead it appears that management and the board have ignored their fiduciary duties to creditors and shareholders of the Company in order to return as little as possible to its creditors and shareholders and favor instead the interests of the variable interest entities and their management and ownership"
This sounds like an accusation from exDirector Yang that current management and directors are trying to minimize or conceal value of the company to deceive shareholders and indeed creditors. Funny, you'd think Yang would know that the company has fiduciary duty to owners but only contract obligation duty to creditor. I guess that shows you what you learn at Wharton or Merrill. Hardly an endorsement for either.