onehundredmph
2年前
Yeah, that pesky comma keeps coming up huh
Looks like there was a proxy vote yesterday for 8000, inc. How is this possible given the history of this security?
Historical References:
8000 inc Stock Certificate (Real Proof)
Etrade (Morgan Stanley) Broker Correspondence on EIGH naked short position
Bryant Response to SEC
Did you notice the "Jury Trial Demanded"?
8000 inc is a private entity
Official notice via the SEC court (later found the SEC acted in an unconstitutional manner)
320 million illegal naked short identified
sca
Letter to SEC identifying there is a naked short position asking for SEC/Finra remedy
https://www.otcmarkets.com/otcapi/company/financial-report/55378/content
13 Broker identified with an excess/imbalance of shares
DTCC
Subject: Re: 8000inc ticker EIGH
From: sletzler@dtcc.com
Date: Mon, 26 Sep 2011 15:43:11 -0400
Dear XXXXXXX,
Your email to XXXXXXXXX was forwarded to me for response.
Since 8000Inc is not and has never been eligible for full services at DTC, DTCC is unaware of any restrictions that may be placed on this security by brokers. But in any case, no action that DTCC or DTC would take would have any impact on trading activities, but would only impact the electronic clearing and settlement of securities held at DTC. My suggestion is that you speak directly to your broker to answer any further questions you may have about 8000Inc.
Steve Letzler
Director, Corporate Communications
DTCC
SEC in-house judges violate right to jury trial, appeals court rules
https://www.reuters.com/legal/government/sec-in-house-judges-violate-right-jury-trial-appeals-court-rules-2022-05-18/
Agency powers under threat in U.S. Supreme Court FTC and SEC cases
https://www.reuters.com/legal/agency-powers-under-threat-us-supreme-court-ftc-sec-cases-2022-11-03/
U.S. Supreme Court rules federal courts have jurisdiction to hear challenges of FTC, SEC
https://bankingjournal.aba.com/2023/04/u-s-supreme-court-rules-federal-courts-have-jurisdiction-to-hear-challenges-of-ftc-sec/
Does anybody want to show Jacob Mohs that he has custody of a security that should not be trading???
Rule 144 violation*
$13
$EIGH
onehundredmph
2年前
To be honest, the EIGH corporate action never went thru in the past. The SEC was notified and did nothing to enforce the settlement rules and regulations of an identified naked short position. Correspondence between brokers even identified fails to deliver in the 8000 Inc disclosure statements. Also, If you remember, there were a few solutions to resolve this private security trading illegally on the OTC. One of them was to cancel all common and transfer to preferred with a new cusip. That cusip was created successfully. So it really boils down to how does a hedge fund take over the custodianship of a private entity that should not be trading electronically in the first place?
Well if the financing is there to support any reporting and handing fees with OTCM and the TA, Signature Stock Transfer, then I guess we shall see how it plays out.
The problem is with the OTCM IDQS system. After all fillings are up to date and fees paid that need to be reviewed and processed, there is no guarantee any enforcement will be made. The 15c211 quotation process is broken. In my opinion, it is no different than CRGP (formerly their TA was Signature Stock Transfer) going private corporate action is stuck in right now. The attempted hijacking over custodianship certainly made things interesting (somehow quotation was granted and it traded for a year, I would assume illegally). All of that didn't change the fact that an imbalance of shares was identified in Nebraska court and was never resolved.
EIGH would be in the same situation where all of its securities trading on the OTC, which essentially are obligations (debt) that is illegal, would be required to be settled.
So is this another attempted hijacking or is this an entity protecting the shareholder's rights to what was perceived as real property when it was sold to them by their brokers?
Another example is the $MMTLP matter. Its was created via a special dividend as a private preffered security that was allowed to illegally trade. There is a pending corporate action in progress. Shareholders are stuck because of a FINRA U3 halt for "extraordinary events"
Seem like all 3 tickers CRGP, MMTLP, and EIGH are private securities by way of slight differences that should not be trading while the SEC, OTCM and FINRA do not know what to do because they got caught in their failures of governance in the financial system.
$EIGH
$CRGP
$MMTLP