Again - I wish to emphasize that I hope Seiden is able to recover significant assets for US share holders since that is good for me. But - it is not a slam dunk as many seem to be indicating.
First, those quoting one questionable success in Chinese courts may or may not be correct in doing so since they do not use binding precedents. Although there are now "guiding cases" that may work as well; search "As Chinese courts announce 'guiding cases,' Stanford Law School helps to spread the word"
However, as Bloomberg has stated there are risks; search "U.S. Investors in China’s Internet Companies Face Risks."
Hey - I hope the best for US investors - but Seiden still hasn't proven that he can recover significant assets for US investors within China in either the ASTN or the SCEI test cases. Excuse me for taking a wait and see attitude.
Again, since Chinese law doesn't use presidence, your court case means little. Its all a case by case basis. Chinese courts have also ruled that VIEs are illegal. So its impossible to determine how the courts will rule.
I too am glad to see there is some action. I'm just not declaring total victory prematurely. Making life difficult for Chinese CEOs is not what I want to see accomplished. I want to see US investors get some of their money back.
As for Ali Baba, if the SEC really wanted to protect US investors, they would block its listing until Chinese authorities cooperate with them in prosecuting previous frauds. For example, in the case of DYNP, they couldn't even serve papers in China since they couldn't get any help. This to one of the most famous and celebrated Chinese CEOs who can't be that hard to find.
You missed the buy. If you had made it when the correct TA signal was given you could sell if $18.50 gets hit and still have made a nice profit.
We still have a year or so before Yellen raises rates - if she does that is. Rates normally start rising a few months before in anticipation, so now you may have a 9 month wait while missing the dividends.
Both my EHI and FFC are doing well since I bought on the VIX spike when the 10Y stabilized. If I see the 10Y start to spike again I will cash out and take profits.
Yes, it does appear that Seiden has forced Ren to play another card instead of the going dark one. Now we have to wait to see what Seiden's next card is. Whatever, I doubt that this game is close to over.
They did not rule that ANY company should do anything. They was a ruling for one specific company and that company alone. One can also find many ruling that say just the opposite. Which is exactly what would expect to find when Chinese law goes on a case by case basis instead of precedence as US law does.
You say that Ren "capitulated" to Seiden. How do you know that?
Ren may just be following his lawyers advice. Now Ren can argue in Chinese court that he has respected shareholders while he stacks the board of directors in his favor of course. Ren can now claim that the Nevada judge, who has no jurisdiction in China by the way, got it all wrong. After that, who is to say if Chinese courts will not take the side of their own citizen against what they may see as a foreigner poking his noise into Chinese business where it doesn't belong.
Contrary to your uninformed opinion - there are quite a few if's and's and but's. You are just hoping that it all turns in your favor which there is absolutely no guarantee of. Now while I hope it does, since that would be good for me as one who is also a victim of the Chiscamers, only time will tell.
As far as "jackels" of whatever. The only ones I know are the Chinese CEOs and their US associates who cheated countless US citizens such as myself.
The ruling was only for one case. Since Chinese law does not follow precedence as US law does; it says almost nothing about similar cases. In China everything is on a case by case bases. You are forgetting that in prior cases Chinese courts have ruled that VIE structures are illegal.
Pretending to understand what is going on in China is a complete folly as has been proven time after time; and attempting to understand what Chinese CEOs like Ren are up to is even a greater folly. All one can do is to take a wait and see attitude while hoping for the best. Anything more than that is complete hubris!
But Seiden can't sell the Chinese company without permission from Chinese courts. Ren, by issuing financials and allowing new board elections, may have just defanged Seiden. Now Ren can argue that US courts were wrong and that he is indeed supporting shareholders.
It's very hard at this point to know how all of this is going to fall out. It could only mean years of legal wrangling in Chinese courts where only the lawyers come out as winners. It's all still just a wait and see situation. Although one hopes that US investors can score one against an evil Chinese CEO for once.
SCEI is going to release unaudited financials. That may be a step forward or just a legal ploy to block Seiden. We'll see....
That is made up news. What a joke!
Looks as if Ren's lawyers have advised him to fight back; "The Company will schedule an annual meeting of its shareholders to elect directors immediately following the release of its unaudited financial information as of and for the years ended December 31, 2012 and 2013."
Looks' as if he is going to destroy Seiden's arguments and the rulings by US courts for receivership. Now he can argue in Chinese courts that he is responding to shareholders. Since he himself owns 30% of the shares - if not more; looks as if he will stack the board of directors and say that he responded.
Maybe just going dark will not be the path to go for the Chiscams after all. One wonders if many of the non-reporters will suddenly start reporting unaudited earnings again.
The long drawn out process of Seiden's lawyers fighting Ren's lawyers has begun. After many years of legal fighting - who will win? Well - other than the lawyers that is.
I wonder how much they paid to get a pump from Cramer and gang?
Looks as if they want to unload some more stock as they did during the private placement.
No they didn't. In one case they did. But as I mentioned Chinese courts don't operate as US courts do. They don't use precedence.
Actually, the first key - is Chinese courts. Remember that Chinese courts don't follow presidence as US courts do, so even if the Sino-Enviromental case is similar it may not mean much.
The second key is fees. Seiden and Marks along with a bevy of lawyers could make out quite well if Chinese courts decide in their favor, but after fees, investors may recover only pennies. That's what has been happening in the fraud cases that have been settled at least.
I'm watching this case closely and hoping for a meaningful recovery. And if it does occur, I too will be hiring Seiden. Still - I'll believe it when I see it.
OK, show me the court decision. I have never heard of it, so I remain doubtful. However, as I've always stated, I hope Seiden is successful.
But that could only happen if Chinese courts agree. Hong Kong may be going along with Seiden, but that doesn't mean that China will. When it comes down to Ren vs. Seiden in China courts who wins?
But if Seiden can pull it off, he is going to be a rich man since every investor in the other Chiscams will be beating down his door.