Five months and still can't see how CRGP can be ac
Post# of 11039
Posted On: 01/06/2016 2:54:24 PM
Five months and still can't see how CRGP can be accused of fraud. Maybe negligence in the worst case.
It's far-fetched to me that the director of a tiny foreign mining company knew of loopholes in the payment system and clearing company COR Clearing got caught. COR's job is precisely that, to clear those kind of transactions.
CRGP publicly announced the share buyback intention and later the progress. So, still less fraudulent.
COR went against shareholders in an attempt to recover funds. This only confirms that CRGP did not get all that money.
CRGP announced the divi for the shares in the market on Jun 30th. and paid for that.
If extra shares were in the market by Aug 18th. that's because the note holders dumped them. And this dumping also created the conditions (lower share price) to trigger the special dividend.
The note holders (COR's clients) are responsible to cover the extra divi.
I think COR did not go against their clients because they may have an "all included" or "worry free" kind of contract. They clear and their clients have the guarantee -as long as they pay the fees- that no unexpected costs will appear.
I see absolutely no merit on CORs lawsuit.
The only problem I see is that CRGP is not present to defend themselves.
It's far-fetched to me that the director of a tiny foreign mining company knew of loopholes in the payment system and clearing company COR Clearing got caught. COR's job is precisely that, to clear those kind of transactions.
CRGP publicly announced the share buyback intention and later the progress. So, still less fraudulent.
COR went against shareholders in an attempt to recover funds. This only confirms that CRGP did not get all that money.
CRGP announced the divi for the shares in the market on Jun 30th. and paid for that.
If extra shares were in the market by Aug 18th. that's because the note holders dumped them. And this dumping also created the conditions (lower share price) to trigger the special dividend.
The note holders (COR's clients) are responsible to cover the extra divi.
I think COR did not go against their clients because they may have an "all included" or "worry free" kind of contract. They clear and their clients have the guarantee -as long as they pay the fees- that no unexpected costs will appear.
I see absolutely no merit on CORs lawsuit.
The only problem I see is that CRGP is not present to defend themselves.
(0)
(0)Calissio Resources Group, Inc. (CRGP) Stock Research Links
IMHO
Always, always do you own DD. Only invest funds you can afford to lose and trust nobody but yourself.
Always, always do you own DD. Only invest funds you can afford to lose and trust nobody but yourself.