SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Technology Stocks : CDDD -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: afrayem onigwecher who wrote (338)12/13/1999 2:15:00 PM
From: Sir Auric Goldfinger  Respond to of 924
 
Getting closer Isaac: "NEW YORK (Dow Jones)--An arbitration panel ordered two former principals of the defunct broker-dealer Kensington Wells to pay a Kentucky couple $19.7 million, possibly the largest arbitration
award ever in a stock-fraud case.
Whether the two men, Salvador Tacher and Steven H. Vornea,
ever pay remains to be seen. Tacher, of Old Brookville, N.Y.,
was indicted earlier this year on a range of charges related to
stock fraud. Vornea, of Brookville, N.Y., has been ordered to
pay awards in other arbitration cases, but has yet to pay up,
according to the lawyer in the current case. It wasn't know what
assets, if any, the men possess.
Kensington Wells filed for bankruptcy protection in January
1998. Federal prosecutors allege 15 people associated with the
Mineola, N.Y., firm cheated thousands of investors of tens of
millions of dollars through three fraudulent initial public offerings
in 1994 and 1995. The firm and 12 of its brokers were charged
with fraudulent sales practices by the National Association of
Securities Dealers. Both the federal and the NASD cases are pending.

William and Jennifer Warren, a married couple, were the owners
and only employees of a small telecommunications business in Simpsonville,
Ky., when a Kensington Wells broker, Christopher O. Cortes, began
cold-calling them in 1995, according to their statement of claim.
They opened an account in February of that year, and upon the
recommendation of Cortes, purchased shares of King World Productions,
then a well-known New York Stock Exchange stock.
Thereafter, Cortes and another broker, James A. McInerny, recommended
several high-risk stocks in which Kensington Wells was the market
maker. The Warrens lost $2.6 million on investments in these stocks.
They claim Kensington Wells pulled a "bait-and-switch," first
recommending a blue-chip stock to win their trust, then "conning"
them to buy risky stocks controlled by the firm.
Cortes and McInerney, who were named in the Warrens' complaint,
reached a verbal settlement with the couple prior to the arbitration
hearing, and their dismissal from the case was pending.
Tacher and Vornea, who were listed as representing themselves
in the case, didn't appear at the arbitration hearings in September,
despite receiving subpoenas from the Warrens. Neither man could
be reached for comment. There were no telephone listings for Vornea
or Tacher at their most recent known addresses. In a written reply
to the claim, Tacher said the Warrens carefully monitored their
account, and received no guarantees of a profit to induce them
to buy any stocks. Vornea said in a written reply that he didn't
know enough to form a belief as to the truth of the allegations,
and he denied being a control person of Kensington Wells, as alleged.

In September, a three-member NASD arbitration panel in Louisville
awarded the Warrens out-of-pocket losses of $2.6 million, plus
prejudgment interest of $913,404, attorney's fees of $1.1 million
and other costs. The arbitrators also awarded $15 million in punitive
damages, bringing the total award to $19.7 million. The decision
was recently made available to the public. Vornea and Tacher are
jointly and severally liable, meaning if one of them fails to
pay, the other could be forced to pay the entire award.
"We're very hopeful to get at least part of the award, and
we're going to try hard to get it all," said the Warrens' lawyer,
Charles C. Mihalek of Lexington, Ky.
Some former Kensington Wells brokers also named in the Warrens'
complaint reached confidential settlement agreements with the
couple. Others have filed for bankruptcy protection, and therefore
no action was taken against them.
The award could be the largest ever in a penny-stock case.
In 1998, an arbitration panel awarded an Indiana investor $13.1
million in a judgment against Stratton Oakmont, perhaps the most
infamous penny-stock brokerage of the 1990s. That award was deemed
the largest ever at the time.



To: afrayem onigwecher who wrote (338)12/13/1999 10:09:00 PM
From: Sir Auric Goldfinger  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 924
 
You orchestrate the above market buyins you lyin' crim. dazzled.com



To: afrayem onigwecher who wrote (338)12/15/1999 2:24:00 PM
From: Sir Auric Goldfinger  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 924
 
Hey Isaac, you made the tape: "TALES OF THE TAPE: C3D's Dramatic Run Invites Questions
12/15/99 14:0 (New York)

By Sean Davis

NEW YORK (Dow Jones)--It isn't often that a Bulletin Board
stock goes from 2 cents a share to $59.50 in less than a year.
That's what happened to C3D Inc. (CDDD), which says it owns intellectual
property rights to a breakthrough in data storage.
Talk of C3D's rise has been filling the Internet message boards
favored by speculators and short-term investors. The little stock
that could has both its champions and skeptics, and only time
will tell who is right.
But one thing is certain: Whenever a company with negative
stockholders' equity and assets of $1.1 million attains a market
value of $813.2 million - its value as of Tuesday's close - investors
should ask questions.
Some of these questions should be asked of any company. What
does it do? Does it have enough money to do it? Who runs the company?
Who are its major shareholders? A few are questions unique to
C3D. What is its link to a Vancouver stock promoter? Why is it
being mentioned in connection with the slaying of two stock promoters
in New Jersey?
What does C3D do? Right now, it develops technology and files
patent applications. The company has never recorded a sale. It
claims to be developing a technology that uses fluorescent material
to dramatically increase the capacity of digital videodisks and
other storage media. C3D plans to form partnerships with other
companies to bring the technology to market in low-cost devices
such as laptop computers, digital cameras and electronic book
readers.
C3D recently held a demonstration of its technology in San
Jose for a number of big storage-industry players. Jim Porter,
a respected disk analyst who attended, says the demonstration
was bona fide. "It's a substantially well thought-out technology."

But Porter says there are some unanswered questions. First,
can the technology be mass-produced cheaply? More important, does
the world want to buy it? Unlike DVD, which is reaching a mass
audience this Christmas, the C3D device isn't rewritable. That
could limit its commercial appeal.
C3D begs to differ. "For things like e-books and turning handheld
computer devices into instruments with much greater storage and
capabilities, you're going to need our type of memory," says Michael
Goldberg, the company's director of legal affairs. C3D is working
on making its device rewritable, he says, but if the company succeeds
in making storage media cheap enough, users won't need rewritable
disks - they will simply throw away used disks and start fresh.

Another obstacle to widespread commercialization of the technology
is establishing it as a standard. That will take some savvy wheeling
and dealing, and right now, Porter says, C3D is stocked with techies
and could use some business types. C3D's Goldberg heartily agrees,
and he says the company plans to hire people with industry experience
to market the technology.
Does C3D have enough money to do what it says it is going to
do? The company said in November it had enough money to fund operations
through the end of the month. It hasn't announced any new financing
since then. Moreover, C3D says it will need $20 million to fund
operations over the next year. Because of the uncertainty over
funding, C3D's independent auditor, BDO Seidman, has expressed
"substantial doubt about the company's ability to continue as
a going concern."
In fact, C3D is in talks to secure cash, Goldberg says, adding
the customary Wall Street warning that nothing is assured. "We
are currently in negotiations with both venture capital funds
and investment banking firms to resolve that issue." C3D wants
to raise enough capital to list on either Nasdaq or the American
Stock Exchange, he says.
Who runs C3D? The chairman of the board is Itzhak Yaakov, a
retired Israeli Army general who holds a master of science from
MIT. For the last 10 years of his military service, he was Israel's
chief of defense research and development. His consulting firm
receives $5,000 a month from C3D, and he owns 50,000 shares as
well as options to buy 100,000 more.
Eugene Levich is C3D's chief executive. He has a Ph.D. from
the Landau Institute of Theoretical Physics in Moscow and has
published more than 90 scientific papers. Although Levich draws
no salary from C3D, C3D's predecessor paid management fees of
$200,000 in 1997 and 1998 to a company of which he is a principal.


Tax Havens And Private Placements

Who owns C3D? First, some history. The company was incorporated
in 1995 as Latin Venture Partners. The names of its original owners
weren't disclosed in C3D's SEC filing. Latin Venture Partners
changed its name to C3D earlier this year. The company didn't
have any business operations until Oct. 1, when it acquired most
of the assets of Constellation 3D Technology Ltd. for 9.75 million
restricted shares. This was a reverse merger that made Constellation
the parent company and C3D the acquired entity. Constellation's
assets included a Delaware limited-liability company that owns
the intellectual property rights to the new technology, a Russian
research-and-development company, 99% of an Israeli R&D company,
and a Delaware shell corporation.
Constellation owns 70.4%, of C3D, representing the 9.75 million
shares it received in the reverse merger. But who owns Constellation?
Well, the trail starts in Israel, makes a detour through the Caribbean
tax havens of Nevis and the British Virgin Islands, and ends in
another tax haven, the tiny European principality of Liechtenstein.
The ultimate owners of 55% of Constellation are three Liechtenstein
trusts, two of which benefit the families of Levich and Lev Zaidenberg,
a C3D director. In total, executives and directors own 5.64 million
shares, or 40.7%, of C3D.
C3D's complex ownership owes to the fact it was designed to
provide tax benefits to the multinational owners of a privately
held company, Goldberg says. "There are some very Draconian tax
consequences in some of these countries." The reverse merger was
the first step in an overhaul of the ownership structure, he says.

C3D has a public float of about 3.5 million shares. Virtually
all of this was issued by the shell company C3D prior to its merger
into Constellation. On March 24 of this year, the shell C3D issued
3,125,000 shares to 16 high-net-worth investors for a total of
$250,000, or 8 cents a share. The main people in this group, including
a businessman named Jim O'Callahan, were based in Ireland, says
Philip J. Garratt, who worked for the group. On May 7, the shell
C3D issued 453,255 shares to offshore investors for a total of
$1,813,020, or $4 a share. C3D's Goldberg says he doesn't know
who bought these shares.
What's the Vancouver connection? One rumor on Internet message
boards is that a Vancouver stock promoter with a shady history
is connected with C3D. These rumors appear to be about Garratt,
an Australia native who is currently chief executive of Shopping
Sherlock Inc. (SSLK), an e-commerce company. In 1994, Garratt
voluntarily resigned as chief executive of Cycomm International
as part of a deal with Canadian regulators to get approval for
a Cycomm stock offering. The Canadian authorities had been investigating
Cycomm's insider trading and its public disclosures.
Garratt says he did work for the investors who bought C3D shares
on March 24. "I was asked to come in and do some due diligence
on C3D before these people put in thier money," he says. As for
the problems at Cycomm, he says they resulted from a mistake in
judgment he made about a business partner. He says contrary to
Canadian media reports, he wasn't a stock promoter prior to heading
Cycomm. "I was an investor."
Finally, what's the connection to the two stock promoters murdered
in New Jersey? In October, the New York Times reported that investigators
were looking into whether the two slain promoters became involved
in a fight over C3D's share price. Traders who were betting C3D's
price would fall told authorities one of the victims was helping
them, and they feared he and the other victim were killed because
of that help, the Times reported. Since then, the Times and other
publications have said investigators are considering other scenarios
as well. C3D's Goldberg says the company had no ties to the slain
promoters, and has not been contacted by any authorities investigating
the killings.



To: afrayem onigwecher who wrote (338)12/17/1999 10:21:00 AM
From: Sir Auric Goldfinger  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 924
 
Internet Implicated in Stock-Fraud Arrests in California. Two California men were charged yesterday with conspiracy to commit securities fraud in a case that shows both how easy it is to inflate the price of stocks artificially on the Internet and, prosecutors say,
how quickly such culprits can be identified.

The United States attorney in Los Angeles and
the Securities and Exchange Commission
contend that the men -- Arash Aziz-Golshani
and Hootan Melamed, both 23 years old and
recent college graduates -- sent bogus messages
over the Internet to pump up the price of stock
in an obscure bankrupt company. The share
price rose from 13 cents to more than $15 in
less than two trading days last month,
prosecutors say, reaping $364,000 in profits for
Mr. Aziz-Golshani, Mr. Melamed and a third
man.

On Friday, Nov. 12, according to prosecutors,
Mr. Aziz-Golshani, Mr. Melamed and the third man, Allen Derzakharian,
26, sat down at public computers in the biomedical library at the
University of California at Los Angeles and tapped into the Internet.
Using 50 different Web identities, prosecutors say, the three men sent
more than 500 messages to three hot investment Web sites over the
weekend, all promoting shares of NEI Webworld Inc., a bankrupt
commercial printing company based in Dallas. They called NEI an
imminent takeover candidate even though they knew it was not,
prosecutors say.

The case, among the first involving charges of Internet fraud, illustrates
how easy it is to send stocks soaring by using the Internet. But
prosecutors say the case also sends an important message to people who
think the anonymity of the Internet allows them to manipulate stocks by
posting false statements about a company. Although many people who
violate securities laws have migrated to the Internet, regulators say this
case shows how quickly investigators can track down anyone who posts
bogus electronic messages about companies or stocks.

"The Internet is no longer the Wild Wild Web," said Christopher M. E.
Painter, an assistant United States attorney and the computer crime
coordinator for the central district of California. "It's a new territory that
law enforcement is trying to tame. We will go after these cases."

Regulators say that the men began promoting NEI Webworld
electronically after they had bought 97 percent of the company's available
stock for themselves at prices ranging from 5 cents to 17 cents a share.
In October, there was virtually no market activity in shares of NEI, which
traded on only 3 of 21 trading days. On Friday, Nov. 12, the stock
closed at 13 cents a share. But rhapsodic messages sent by the men over
the weekend whipped up investor interest in the shares, prosecutors say,
and the stock opened for trading the following Monday at $8.

Investors eagerly bought the shares,
pushing them to $15.50 in about a
half-hour, prosecutors say.
Meanwhile, Mr. Aziz-Golshani, Mr.
Melamed and Mr. Derzakharian sold
their shares into the buying frenzy at
prices ranging from 25 cents to
$15.1875. Mr. Aziz-Golshani made
$152,742 in profits, and Mr.
Melamed and Mr. Derzakharian, who had a joint brokerage account,
together realized $211,250 in gains.

Mr. Aziz-Golshani and Mr. Melamed were arrested in Los Angeles on
criminal and civil charges. Mr. Derzakharian was charged with civil fraud
by the S.E.C. but was not charged in the criminal case.

Richard H. Walker, director of enforcement at the S.E.C., said: "Let this
serve as a warning to con men: if you use the Internet to manipulate our
securities markets, we can and will find you. Though the perpetrators in
the case went to great lengths to hide from us, we discovered them within
a matter of days."

Under securities laws, it is illegal to engage in false representations or
manipulative practices when buying or selling a security. This is just what
Mr. Aziz-Golshani and Mr. Melamed did, prosecutors say. A Federal
judge froze the assets of all three men yesterday.

Mr. Aziz-Golshani's attorney, Randall J. Sunshine of Santa Monica,
Calif., said he could not comment on the complaint because he had not
read it.

Mark J. Werksman, the lawyer representing Mr. Melamed, said: "My
client denies manipulating the market in the way that the government
alleges. Until we know more about exactly what they claim my client did
and how the market was affected it's too early to tell how this case will
turn out."

According to the complaint, one of the men posted 10 identical messages
on various Yahoo finance message boards predicting a buyout of NEI,
whose stock trades under the symbol NEIP, by a private company called
LGC Wireless. Using the Web name "ticlopidinel," the messages said:
"Buying NEIP early would entitle you to a share of LGC Wireless when
it goes public next week. Look for a massive move to $5-$10 as
wireless stocks are very hot."

Prosecutors say that Mr. Aziz-Golshani and Mr. Melamed wrote the
message and based their Web name on ticlopidine, a stroke-prevention
drug that had been discussed in classes Mr. Melamed had recently
attended as a pharmacy student at Western University of Health Sciences
in Pomona, Calif.

When a skeptic in a chat room questioned the viability of an NEI buyout,
prosecutors say Mr. Aziz-Golshani posted this answer: "I called on
Saturday and no officers were in to answer my call, just a receptionist
who are always the last to know." Then he added, prosecutors say,
"People who know of the deal are buying in given the large volume the
last few days."

But no buyout came. After peaking above $15 on Monday, Nov. 15,
NEI shares closed at 75 cents. The stock closed yesterday at 18.75
cents a share.

Securities fraud has migrated to the Internet, regulators say, because
stocks can be propelled there with little more than effusive talk and rosy
predictions. Before the Web became stock-tip central, someone who
wanted to manipulate a company's shares had to employ rooms full of
stockbrokers flogging stocks to unsuspecting investors by telephone.
Now an electronic message does the trick instantly.

Prosecutors in the criminal case against Mr. Aziz-Golshani and Mr.
Melamed contend that the Internet promotion of NEI was not the first for
the two men. According to the complaint, although Mr. Aziz-Golshani,
who lives in Beverly Hills, told prosecutors that he operates a business
from his home selling leather jackets online, messages emanating from
computers at the U.C.L.A. biomedical library last September promoted
shares in a company called Justwebit.com Inc. A review of brokerage
firm account statements belonging to Mr. Aziz-Golshani and Hooshang
Melamed, Hootan Melamed's father, indicate that trades in the company
were made that resulted in profits to both. Mr. Aziz-Golshani graduated
from U.C.L.A. last spring.