Dave,
First of all I should make my position clear. I speculated in this
company based on the news play and was and still remain responsible
for the outcome, positive or negative, of my actions. However,one of
the factors influencing the amount of money in my initial speculation
was this company's claim,in their public news releases,to be a com-
pany that reports to the SEC. I would have played had I known they
were non-reporting but I probably would only have bought about 10,000
shares. This is one of the few hard and fast rules I have about investing or speculating as I have been burned big time in the past
by companies that do not report or claim to have some trouble in re-
porting.Further,CVIA's latest release contains a statement saying they are in the process of setting up to file electronically as per new
sec rules of Jan 1,1998. This is also a mis-statement as,I have reported before, electronic filing has been mandatory since may 1996.
Though it is not a new rule as CVIA would want you to believe judging by the release,the SEC could be at fault for not enforcing the ruling
against the few stragglers until this January. Just to illustrate my
point once more before I finally shut up about it, if this company
was fully reporting I would have had info on the reg-s filing from
my Edgar subscription around Jan. 30. Here it is March 1st and CVIA
with it's vaunted crew of "industry experts" is just now figuring
out how to do a filing. To me this is not impressive right off the bat
as it seems to me someone on the acquisition team should be well
versed in matters pertaining to SEC filings and rules.
Am I asking too much from a company just getting started again
after a disastrous fall? Possibly- and I admit to being pissed about
this SEC thing -though probably more at myself for not checking the
facts sooner. But if these guys are going to talk the talk-like the
saying goes- they have to walk the walk and I'm only asking they do
what they publicly stated they were doing.
As for the reg-s being a surprise- you're correct that it was always
a possibility with a company like this and I knew that going in as well but consider the following from Milks web page" "A Reg. S stock issue is a possibility, but only as a last resort. Real
growth, in my opinion, cannot be achieved by extensive use of this type of
program." - Jack Arnold, 1/5/98
So Arnold says that here on the 5th of January, and then on the 13th announces that they have completed an offering for 500,000 dollars.
Does it take less than eight days to get a reg -s offering in motion?
I myself do not know.
Is this the "extremely generous" information you were referring to in
the previous posting? If I wanted to be nasty( and I don't) I could make a case for that statement being a pretty nice head fake.
And what did you mean by this? -#s 1986,1987,1988 My conscience will not allow me to take them to task on such issues". Very cryptic.
And this-"CVIA is savvy enough to politely stretch the
sec rule in an order to keep any related "news" element in harmony with their present efforts". Any other rules CVIA out there
that CVIA may be able to "politly stretch"?
Sorry to be so long winded, all the best, p.b. |
