If we have a case, it certainly isn't based on thi
Post# of 30066
Posted On: 04/11/2016 11:39:01 AM
If we have a case, it certainly isn't based on this:
"As Sichenzia is no doubt aware, Mr. Kahlon has been sued by the SEC for practicing the business model that he taught to Mr. Sason."
Kahlon was in trouble with the SEC because he sold shares that weren't registered. Magna isn't doing the same thing remotely.
The shares Magna are selling are registered and the terms of the deal are fully disclosed.
The Kahlon stuff is fluff as it relates to AMBS. Similar to the description of penny stocks and wildcatters.
If we have a case, it will be based on other illegal activities - illegal shorting, violations of terms of leak out agreement, conspiracy with offshore funds, etc.
That is the missing piece. You can't just say they are violating the securities laws. You have to point to where they are.
The beauty of Magna (and payday loans) is that they don't violate the law. The law should be changed to ban toxic financing like this but, as of right now, it is not illegal in and of itself.
"As Sichenzia is no doubt aware, Mr. Kahlon has been sued by the SEC for practicing the business model that he taught to Mr. Sason."
Kahlon was in trouble with the SEC because he sold shares that weren't registered. Magna isn't doing the same thing remotely.
The shares Magna are selling are registered and the terms of the deal are fully disclosed.
The Kahlon stuff is fluff as it relates to AMBS. Similar to the description of penny stocks and wildcatters.
If we have a case, it will be based on other illegal activities - illegal shorting, violations of terms of leak out agreement, conspiracy with offshore funds, etc.
That is the missing piece. You can't just say they are violating the securities laws. You have to point to where they are.
The beauty of Magna (and payday loans) is that they don't violate the law. The law should be changed to ban toxic financing like this but, as of right now, it is not illegal in and of itself.
(1)
(0)