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.
Pastimes : Investment Chat Board Lawsuits -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: Jeffrey S. Mitchell who wrote (496)7/27/2000 9:57:49 AM
From: StockDung  Respond to of 12465
 
Why does ZSUN not have any fundamentals? Why is ZSUN worth less than one dollar?

By: frisky $$$
Reply To: None Wednesday, 26 Jul 2000 at 8:18 PM EDT
Post # of 24386


Why does ZSUN not have any fundamentals? Why is ZSUN worth less than one dollar?
(1) ZSUN changed its name from a bankrupt beverage refilling company, Bestway USA in September 1998.

(2) ZSUN's auditor, Jones & Jensen, has been charged by SEC for not following Generally Accepted Auditing Standards in an unrelated audit.

(3) ZSUN reversely merged with a money-losing printing and tele-marketing company, New Age Publication in Philippines in October 1998. The company had a net asset of $807,956 including an accumulated deficit of $20,670 as of December 31, 1997. It later changed its name to Momentum Asia. ZSUN issued 4,000,000 shares for Momentum Asia. The deal was handled by a counsel who was found guilty in participating the pump-and-dump scheme of Electro-Optical Systems by a U S court.

(4) ZSUN acquired Momentum Internet from Anthony Tobin's Vulcan Consultants in October 1998. At the time of acquisition, Momentum Internet has no assets. In fact, Mr. Tobin borrowed $70,000 from New Age Publication. Mr. Tobin later paid back with 130,000 shares of ZSUN (split-adjusted) in December 1998. In other words, Mr. Tobin received $70,000 and 1,000,000 shares (split-adjusted) from ZSUN.

(5) At time of the formation, ZSUN exchanged its own shares with related parties: TMOT, DDD and LCAI. If the shares were not restricted, ZSUN classified them as marketable securities. If they were restricted, ZSUN classified them as common stock held to maturity. If ZSUN had sold their own shares, ZSUN could only have classified the excess of par as additional paid-in capital. In other words, ZSUN shifted the capital raising activities into investing activities. The cost of owning TMOT, DDD, LCAI was negligible. Therefore, ZSUN could generate a huge amount of realized and unrealized gain on marketable securities in 1998 and 1999.

(6) ZSUN lost good deal of money in Momentum Asia and Momentum Internet in 1998. However, it booked $535,802 of realized gain on marketable securities and $712,438 of unrealized gain on marketable securities to hide the loss from Internet businesses. ZSUN then issued several press releases on 2/8/99, 3/13/99, 5/27/99 and claimed that it had $.47 basic EPS and $.11 diluted EPS. ZSUN even posted its "audited" financial statements on its web site. Jones & Jensen issued an unqualified opinion on the financial statements. Suckers flocked in, especially the uninformed foreigners, bought the stock based on the false and misleading financial figures. ZSUN stock was pumped up to as high as $17. We later discovered that sales were overstated from $760,520 to $2,289,158. The loss on BVEX of $165,449 was not reported. The diluted EPS was only $.04. If one excludes the realized and unrealized gain from TMOT, DDD and LCAI, one will discover that ZSUN incurred a loss per share of $.03 in 1998. ZSUN filed seven versions of 10sb, one version of financial statements posted in its web site. Surprisingly, Jones & Jensen issued unqualified opinion for all different versions of financial statements for 1998 and 1999. IMHO, ZSUN and Jones & Jensen have violated Section 17 (a) of Securities Act of 1933, Section 9, Section 10 and Section 10a of Securities Act of 1934.

(7)ZSUN acquired Asia4sale.com from Brian Hodgson. ZSUN paid him $15,000 and 100,000 shares. It was a great deal for Mr. Hodgson because Asia4sale virtually had no assets.

(8) ZSUN knew that it could not show too much profit from selling DDD, LCAI and TMOT. On March 31, 1999, it acquired Online Investors Advantage, a day trading seminar firm from Scott Elder, Ross Jardine et al. ZSUN paid them $400,000 cash, 1,000,000 free shares, 5,000,000 escrow shares plus two shares for every dollar of EBITDA from OIA. According to 10sb version 7 issued on May 11, 2000, ZSUN paid them additional $6,000,000 and 9,820,152 shares. In summary, Scott Elder et al received $6,400,000 and 10,820,152 ZSUN shares for the whole deal. At the time of acquisition, OIA had net assets of $ 148,543. They have taken back more than the net profits they contributed to ZSUN in 1999. ZSUN booked the excessive payment as good (garbage)-will and additional paid-in capital to dress-up its balance sheet. Too bad, the suckers could not understand. Moreover, ZSUN paid 150,000 shares to Gloabl Direct Marketing in December 1998 as a compensation for finding OIA.

(9)ZSUN issued multiple press releases about their record earnings of every quarter in 1999 as well as the first quarter of 2000. According to 10sb version 7, ZSUN reported net income of $5.9 million in 1999 and diluted EPS of $.23. The denominator in EPS calculation did not include the additional 9 million shares issued to Scott Elder et al in May 2000. It only used 25,796,000 shares. The actual outstanding shares is over 32 million shares now. The net income of 1999 was mainly from the short-term capital gain of selling Asia4sale of $5 million, OIA's operating income of $6 million, realized gain on marketable securities of $470,185, unrealized gain on marketable securities of $111,749. ZSUN has never disclosed the loss from Internet businesses in its press releases. The suckers can never understand.

(10) ZSUN sold 70% of ownership in Asia4sale.com Ltd. to a group of Taiwanese suckers for $5,000,000. A subsidiary virtually has no assets but some cheap computer equipment. ZSUN needs the money to pay Scott Elder and Ross Jardine et al. Asia4sale.com Ltd. then reversely merged with Asia4sale.com Inc. ZSUN received 2.7 million garbage shares from AFSI. The Taiwanese suckers received 6.3 million garbage shares. God knows who kept the last one million shares of AFSI. ZSUN later paid 800,000 shares of AFSI to its shareholders. Therefore, it could adopt the cost method instead of equity method of accounting. The loss of AFSI will be out of the picture. ZSUN can then use the artificially high market price to value their investment in ANSI. It will create unrealized gain on marketable securities. AFSI had a sale of $70,024 and a loss of $5,006,986 in 1999, a sale of $60,446 and a loss of $138,702 for the first quarter of 2000. However, it had a ludicrous market cap of $120 million. Because AFSI had no cash, it issued 800,000 additional shares to unknown investors at a wholesale price of $2.50 per share. The suckers then paid $8 to $11 at retail price in the open market. AFSI is extremely thinly traded. So far in July, 2000 it only traded for two days with the volume of 2,200 shares. In June 2000, it traded for 13 days with the volume of 46,300 shares. In May 2000, it traded for two days with the volume of 9,500 shares. In April 2000, it had no trades.

(11) ZSUN targeted its customers to Chinese but all its web sites are in English. Only the elite group like Frank Ching can read. MSN, YHOO, China.com and thousands of Chinese and Taiwanese e-commerce all programmed their web sites in Chinese. ZSUN cannot compete at all.

(12) ZSUN kept portraying itself as a profitable Internet holding company. However, 85% to 90% of its revenues and 100% of earnings are from high-priced day trading seminar subsidiary, OIA. All the Internet subsidiaries are losing money. ZSUN made money from OIA day trading seminars and selling and holding of TMOT, DDD, LCAI, HRCT, XNET class of yo-yo stocks.

(13) The price of TMOT, DDD and LCAI are continuously falling. The bubbles have bursted.

(14) In 1999 ZSUN invested a basket of listed stocks by using the profits from selling TMOT, DDD, LCAI. 1999 was a very good year but ZSUN's performance was very miserable. If ZSUN had invested in a money market mutual fund, if would have doubled its return. If the teachers are so lousy, how much can a student learn from them? Besides, the day trading seminar will cost one at least $2,995 a piece.

(15) Tigertooth.com has been under construction for good.

(16) ZSUN newly acquired subsidiaries, Asia Prepress and Asia Internet Services, add no value to ZSUN but cost ZSUN $300,000, 250,000 shares, $159,229 debt. Because they are also located in Subic Bay and Clark, Philippines, the same location that Momentum Asia situated, I wonder whether these two companies are simply piggybacking on Momentum Asia.

(17) ZSUN or ZSUN's related parties hired professional touts to masquerade as unbiased analysts. On November 19, 1999, Ray Dirks' Security Capital Trading issued a strong-buy recommendation with a near-term price target over $15 per share with long-term $30 price target. On December 10, 1999, Access 1 Financial issued a buy recommendation with $36 12-month price target. On April 20, 2000, Stockreporter.com issued a strong buy recommendation with 2000 target price of $28.50. On June 14, 2000, Dirks & Company issued a strong buy recommendation with 6-9 months price target of $30 per share and 12-18 months price target of $60 per share. However, the insiders rushed to the exit door when ZSUN stock started to set 52-week low. David McCoy tried to sell 25,000 shares on April 20, 2000. Serge Rudiger tried to sell 30,000 shares on May 8, 2000. Mark Lindholm tried to unload 30,000 on May 10, 2000. Anthony Tobin tried to liquidate 100,000 shares on June 8, 2000. Pedro Azeudo Rua is trying to sell 1,000 shares on July 31, 2000. If ZSUN stock is going to be $60 per share, why would the insiders try to sell the stock at or near 52-week low price? I understand that the paid touts are protected under First Amendment. However, they must disclose the amount of compensation according to Securities Law. I have not been able to find a paragraph in ZSUN's official press releases that indicated the compensation. IMO, ZSUN and its paid touts might have violated Section 17 (b) of Securities Act of 1933. After their recommendations, the price of ZSUN plummeted. It is now trading around $4.

(18)OIA's revenues in the second quarter of 2000 declined from the first quarter of 2000. There is no more sequential growth. In addition, the goodwill amortization from the acquisition of OIA will reduce EPS further. I believe that ZSUN alleviates the problem with the the unrealized gain from AFSI.

All the information are from ZSUN's SEC filings and ZSUN's official press releases.

ragingbull.altavista.com



To: Jeffrey S. Mitchell who wrote (496)7/27/2000 9:49:22 PM
From: EL KABONG!!!  Respond to of 12465
 
sfgate.com

Online Speech Hit With Offline
Lawsuits
Companies and their critics clash
on message boards

Verne Kopytoff, Chronicle Staff Writer

Monday, June 26, 2000

One Internet user posted an anonymous message
on Yahoo that said Hvide Marine, a Florida
shipping company, ``hornswoggled'' and
``bamboozled'' shareholders out of their money.
Another wrote that the firm's management ``blew it''
and speculated whether they were under
investigation by the Securities and Exchange
Commission.

The posters eventually got what they wanted when
Erik Hvide, the company's chief executive, was
fired. But that was soon followed by the unwelcome
news that Hvide was suing them and several others
for libel, a case that is being closely watched by
companies and the Internet community.

In the past two years, at least 70 so- called
cybersmear cases have been filed against
message-board posters. Among the Bay Area firms
that have tried to fight back against online critics are
E-Trade, Ross Stores and Sun Microsystems.

Companies and executives say these lawsuits are
the only way to protect their reputations and stock
prices. But free- speech advocates say Internet
users are censoring what they post online for fear of
being sued.

``If this trend continues, spirited, healthy and
valuable discourse on these thousands of bulletin

boards about thousands of companies will whither,''
said Christopher Leigh, the lawyer representing the
Internet posters in the Hvide case, which is under
way in Florida. ``People will be afraid to speak their
minds.''

Entwined in the debate are questions about online
anonymity. Internet users may believe that Web
sites guard their identities when they post messages
under pseudonyms, but the truth is that the firms
regularly disclose names when presented with
subpoenas.

However, that practice is being challenged by one
anonymous-message poster who filed a lawsuit
against Yahoo last month. He says the Santa Clara
company violated his rights when it disclosed
personal information about him to a company he
was criticizing.

Most cybersmear suits center on messages posted
on financial Web sites such as Yahoo Finance and
Raging Bull. They provide individual message
boards for more than 7,000 publicly traded stocks
where users can post their views.

The result is millions of opinions ranging from the
thoughtful to the profane. Message writers analyze
everything from company profits, or lack thereof, to
launching personal attacks against executives.

Many small investors visit these message boards
every day and use the information posted there to
make investment decisions. In some cases, people
post disinformation among the messages to illegally
manipulate a stock's price in their favor.

OFFLINE RULES APPLY

Eugene Volokh, a law professor who specializes in
the First Amendment and the Internet at the
University of California at Los Angeles, said rules
governing what people can say in print generally
apply to the Web. For example, people can air
opinions and use hate speech, but they cannot post
trade secrets or intentional lies that hurt the
reputation of others.

``Those kinds of statements are just as punishable
online as off,'' Volokh said.

Most cybersmear suits begin with a company filing a
complaint naming ``John Doe'' as a defendant. The
suit entitles the company to issue subpoenas to
uncover the message poster's identity.

The first subpoena usually asks the message board
to disclose the message poster's Internet service
provider. The ISP is then issued a subpoena asking
it to reveal the poster's name.

Bruce Fischman, an attorney who has filed several
cybersmear cases for clients, including Hvide, said
people have to be held responsible for the messages
they post online. He advocates that companies and
executives be aggressive in defending themselves or
risk suffering the consequences.

``Companies are tired of taking it on the chin,''
Fischman said. ``You have to fight back or you will
find the value and goodwill of your company will
dissipate. I'm not saying that you don't have the right
to speak, but it has to be responsible.''

Critics of these lawsuits say many of them are
frivolous and are not intended to go to court.
Rather, they say, many are filed to silence and
retaliate against people with whom they do not
agree.

Among the examples that free- speech advocates
cite as being excessive is Raytheon, the defense
contractor, which sued 21 message- board posters
in 1999 for disclosing company trade secrets online.
But many of those ``secrets'' were wrong or already
public.

Some critics also complain that companies do not
take hyperbole, humor and bad taste into account.
For example, PhyCor, a medical management
company, says it was libeled by a Pennsylvania
doctor who wrote that the company was ``under
review for purchase by the Ku Klux Klan, the
Cuban government and the Bank of Iraq,''
statements that could just as easily be the punch line
of a late-night talk show host's joke.

``If these cases were litigated on the merits, most of
the anonymous posters would win,'' said David
Sobel, an attorney with the Electronic Privacy
Information Center, in Washington, D.C. ``The law
recognizes the right to express opinions, even if they
are extremely critical opinions.''

For their part, companies are confronted with a
medium that allows critics to disseminate their views
around the world with the click of a mouse.
Executives say many investors cannot differentiate
between legitimate information and lies, making their
stocks vulnerable to manipulation.

Internet companies justify revealing information
about users by pointing to contracts that users agree
to when registering for service. For example,
Yahoo's states that the company can reveal user
identities in ``special cases'' when ``we believe in
good faith that the law requires it.''

Many companies such as America Online and
Microsoft give users two weeks notice before
revealing their information so that they can try to
have the subpoena dismissed. But Yahoo's policy
was to tell its users nothing about subpoenas,
leaving them in the dark until they were served with
a lawsuit. Yahoo changed its policy in April after
getting complaints.

Indeed, one man has sued Yahoo for revealing his
identity without warning in a libel case. The lawsuit,
filed last month by an Ohio man using the
pseudonym Aquacool 2000, claims that Yahoo
violated his privacy, broke its contract and engaged
in false advertising.

Jerry Yang, Yahoo's co-founder, explained in an
interview that his company is committed to
protecting user privacy. However, he said knowing
what policy to follow is difficult.

``The privacy issue is a legal gray ground,'' Yang
said. ``When you are dealing with a moving
standard, it's hard to say what is right and wrong.''

The courts have not had much opportunity to set the
record straight. Virtually all message-board
cybersmear cases are settled -- often by a poster
agreeing to apologize online -- or dropped before
going to trial.

In one of the few legal decisions involving
cybersmear, a Florida judge ruled that two
defendants in the Hvide case could not keep their
names secret while challenging the suit. The
defendants appealed that decision last week.

Unlike message posters, Internet service providers
such as America Online and Prodigy cannot be
sued for hosting libelous messages posted by
outsiders. They were given immunity by the Federal
Communications Decency Act, passed under the
theory that reviewing thousands of messages every
day would be too cumbersome for the companies.

``It's just like a telephone company can't be held
liable for people using its lines for a defamatory
conversation,'' said Volokh, the UCLA law
professor.

One of the few people to turn the tables on a
cybersmear lawsuit is Les French, a former
executive at Itex, an online bartering company in
Portland, Ore. Itex sued him in 1999 after
discovering that he was posting anonymous
messages demanding the resignation of the chief
executive and claiming that the company was
misreporting its earnings.

But the suit dragged on and the company lost its
appetite for litigation. The attorney bills were getting
big, the company would have to provide documents
for discovery, and French had threatened to take
the case to trial.

In April, Itex settled. It gave $5,000 to French and
$40,000 to an organization he created to help
cybersmear defendants, the John Does Anonymous
Foundation (www.johndoes.org), in exchange for a
promise that he would not countersue for malicious
prosecution.

``I think that people are smart enough to determine
for themselves what information on a message
board is credible,'' French said. ``I don't think we
need a CEO or a judge telling us what we need to
read or not read.''

E-mail Verne Kopytoff at verne@sfgate.com.



To: Jeffrey S. Mitchell who wrote (496)7/28/2000 12:58:19 PM
From: StockDung  Respond to of 12465
 
Finances steal Titan thunder By Max Jarman The Arizona Republic

azcentral.com

Finances steal Titan thunder

By Max Jarman
The Arizona Republic
July 28, 2000

Highflying Titan Motorcycle Co. of America is cruising precariously near the
brink. The company has been unsuccessful in its search for new capital and
may have to file for Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection or liquidate,
according to recent Securities and Exchange Commission filings.

The company, whose $50,000, high-testosterone products have been
featured on the cover of Playboy magazine, is in danger of losing its listing
on the Nasdaq Small Cap Market, not to mention its suppliers and dealer
financing.

The Phoenix company says it plans to lay off 25 percent of its workforce, or
about 50 employees, and sell or close distributorships owned by the Keery
family, which controls Titan. The dealerships owe the company $600,000,
which may be uncorrectable, according to the filings.

Titan had been seeking a replacement for its credit line from Wells Fargo
Bank that expired in April. The company announced July 14 that
negotiations with two possible new lenders had fallen through and the
company had been forced to seek an extension until Sept. 11 on the Wells
Fargo loan. Terms of the extension restrict the company's borrowing; require
it to implement profit improvement and asset reduction plans; and hire an
investment banker to try to sell the company.

If a new credit line can't be arranged, Titan said it will be forced to sell, wind
down its business or file for reorganization. Meanwhile, the company said
that it is being pressured for payments from trade creditors and that it is
becoming increasingly difficult to obtain parts to manufacture its high-end
custom motorcycles.

In addition, two companies that provide dealer financing, Deutsche Financial
services and Transamerica Commercial Finance Corp., are threatening to
cut off the company.

Phone calls requesting comments from company officials were not returned.

Titan was formed in 1994 by 24-year-old Patrick Keery, a
Harley-Davidson customizer, and his father, Frank, a retired electronics
industry executive.

It achieved critical success for its Legacy line of handmade custom
motorcycles that sold for as much as $50,000.

In 1998, the company showed a $237,000 profit on sales of $27.9 million.
In 1999, it succumbed to dealer pressure for a lower-priced product and
geared up to mass-produce a new line of bikes that started at about
$20,000.

But the new Phoenix line and an expansion into Europe proved the
company's undoing. Production delays on the new product combined with
expansion costs to produce an $8.1 million loss for 1999. Titan stock was
unchanged at 50 cents Thursday, down from a 52-week high of $3.75
recorded a year-ago.



To: Jeffrey S. Mitchell who wrote (496)9/22/2000 1:28:28 AM
From: Jeffrey S. Mitchell  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 12465
 
Re: 9/21/00 - [CCCX] Shareholder solicits contributions to sue "basher"

By: aceinvestor10 $$$
Reply To: 2697 by Jeff.Mitchell $$$ Thursday, 21 Sep 2000 at 11:04 PM EDT
Post # of 2773


Jeff, This afternoon I called the Arizona BLM at 602.417.9200 and spoke with Mary Hyde and Paul Buff. Simply put, I asked if zeolite was a locatable mineral and they said yes. The issue of mining the material comes into play when the person owning the claims files for a mining permit.

These two were very helpful and responsive.
I also spoke with Ken Santini who also said that zeolite was a locatable mineral. He is a consultant and did some work in the past on the permanent mining plan. He is in the process of moving but I will try to reach at home again tomorrow. He is very knowledgeable about zeolites ( he did a great deal of the exploration of claims for Anaconda. He also referred me to Bill Tilden an attorney in southern California who specializes in mining law..

My brother flew over the mining site. There are three places that have been mined. The Arizona BLM informed him that everything is in order and CCCX is the registered owner of 58,000 tons of zeolite. It is in the earth with 0 to 20 feet of overburden. In other words, mining it will be cheap.

I will be talking to Mr. Tilden at length tomorrow. I have already had more conversation with enough officials today to know you are full of shxt. You wasted my day today. I rode to Madison Texas today with Karl Jacobs (what a great guy) to meet Mr. Wisenbaker, who was kind enough to drive from Houston and meet us. He will be posting the facts in his own name shortly on this board. He would like to meet you in Arizona on the mine site and take you to the BLM and satisfy you. I’m sure you are to chicken shxt to show. Loser pays all expenses.

Here's my deal. I am tired of you lying about this company that I have invested in. I understad basher, but that is not what you are. I will be exploring every avenue to discover who you are starting in the morning. Applicable charges will be filed against you. You better check the law and hire an attorney. I suggest he be a criminal attorney. Raging bull will hear from my attorney tomorrow. I don’t know what action the company will take but, MF’s coming after you.

I am organizing a shareholders fund to go after Jeff. If no one wants to contribute, I will still pursue him until I find him. I was informed by the Fort Worth Police Department that there is an internet service that can track you to your computer. We are going to find out how good they are. I will be meeting them tomorrow for that information.


This company has great people. More world class ones coming on shortly. Quit waisting you time with this bastxxd. Sorry for my language, but I have had it.

ragingbull.altavista.com

=====

By: primetime100 $$$
Reply To: 2745 by aceinvestor10 $$$ Thursday, 21 Sep 2000 at 11:23 PM EDT
Post # of 2775

THANKYOU ACE, 1st class job of due dilligence.Count me in on expense sharing.This board doesn't need that kind of dialogue.and cccx doesn't deserve it.

ragingbull.altavista.com

=====

By: Fredyfreeloader $$$
Reply To: 2745 by aceinvestor10 $$$ Thursday, 21 Sep 2000 at 11:26 PM EDT
Post # of 2775


There is nothing so low as someone who try's to destroy a company with lies. E-mail me at Fredyfreeloader@yahoo.com with wire transfer instructions. I'm in for a thousand. I also may be able to help you identify Jeff. No secret I want CCCX cheap, say .10 cents, but I want it healthy. I publish truth, not lies.

ragingbull.altavista.com

=====

By: gambler2010 $$$$
Reply To: 2745 by aceinvestor10 $$$ Thursday, 21 Sep 2000 at 11:33 PM EDT
Post # of 2777


Ace, I'm in. E-mail me where to bank transfer $1,001. I wish I had read the post before Fredy and Prime. I like to be first and can't let Fredy out do me. I just met you, and already we are comrads. It will be fun at the annual shareholders meeting, geting to know all of you in person.

ragingbull.altavista.com

=====

By: DD_Thurber68 $$$
Reply To: 2745 by aceinvestor10 $$$ Thursday, 21 Sep 2000 at 11:34 PM EDT
Post # of 2777

ACE - Way to GO!!! That's what I'm talking about.

ragingbull.altavista.com

=====

By: ariesabout $$$
Reply To: 2745 by aceinvestor10 $$$ Thursday, 21 Sep 2000 at 11:39 PM EDT
Post # of 2778


ACE: I see you've done your homework. I owe you a steak!!

ragingbull.altavista.com

=====

By: KONABEAR $$$
Reply To: 2745 by aceinvestor10 $$$ Friday, 22 Sep 2000 at 12:20 AM EDT
Post # of 2778


Right on the mark

Ace, You have done your DD. I know several of the persons you mentioned in your post. How did you ever track down Ken Santini? Is he still in the Englewood, CO area? He is one of the best zeolite geologists in the country. Mary Hyde handled the AANP filings for the Arizona claims. Unfortunately, I did not get my posts on early enough to eliminate you having to go to this effort. If you read them you will find much of the info you just discussed. More people need to do their DD.

ragingbull.altavista.com

=====

By: Jeff.Mitchell $$$
Reply To: 2745 by aceinvestor10 $$$ Friday, 22 Sep 2000 at 12:23 AM EDT
Post # of 2778


Ace, I also initially called the same number your provided for the BLM. I was then told to call the field inspectors to get the specifics about the newly acquired CCCX claim. Apparently you failed to do that. Of course zeolite can be mined... there are zeolite mines across the US and the world. Let's stick to the facts as they apply to CCCX. Let's start with the following memo dated October 14, 1990:

-----
Mr. Louis B. Mehr
Texas Arizona Mining Company
1907 Tarpley
Katy, Texas 77493

Dear Mr. Mehr:

We have accepted your mining notice for work you propose to do on your Rhyolite No. 3 mining claim located in Yavapai County, Arizona. However we would like to bring to your attention that your company was notified in November 1988 that it is the BLM's opinion that the material you propose to mine is not a locatable mineral under the mining law.

We feel it would be in your best interest to contact us prior to any mining activity.

Please contact Bob Fisk at (602) 863-4464.

Sincerely,

Carole K. Hamilton
Area Manager
Lower Gils Resource Area
-----

Just so there was no misunderstanding, I specifically asked about zeolite and whether the memo applied to the other related claims (i.e. Rhyolite No. 4). I was told the reason the zeolite located in the tuft was deemed not locatable was because it was "not zeolite grade", and, yes, that applied to all the related claims.

My conversation with the field office lasted quite some time. I also made calls to various other offices, such as the Yavapai Recorder's office. Much of what I've posted came from notes from these calls, not from idle speculation as you imply.

As for the rest of your post, my favorite part was "I am organizing a shareholders fund to go after Jeff. If no one wants to contribute, I will still pursue him until I find him. I was informed by the Fort Worth Police Department that there is an internet service that can track you to your computer." LOL! That made my day.

First of all, as I told you, I use my real name. If you had any common sense you'd have clicked on my profile here on Raging Bull, seen where I live, and verified that by dialing 411. Second, had you taken the time to read my other posts here you'd have seen I mainly post on Silicon Investor. Furthermore, I maintain a thread there on Investment Chatboard Lawsuits, i.e. people just like me who get sued for exercising their right to free speech (see siliconinvestor.com. You see, I've already been sued three times... although, sorry to disappoint you, I've never been found guilty of a single charge nor have I spent a penny out of pocket in legal fees. Nevertheless, it's your legal right to sue me if you see fit, so whatever floats your boat. In the mean time, just to give us a sense of whether what I've said constitutes defamation, what say we run it by the SEC and see what they say?

- Jeff

ragingbull.altavista.com

=====

By: aceinvestor10 $$$
Reply To: 2768 by Jeff.Mitchell $$$ Friday, 22 Sep 2000 at 1:03 AM EDT
Post # of 2779


Just put your money up and meet us in AZ, you little chicken shxt. Short of that, shut the hxll up. We will be meeting soon anyway you little weasel. I went over all financial and stock arrangements with Mr. Wisenbaker and my attorney. Nothing illegal, or uncommon, and in fact will produce cash earnings for this company. He's not the one selling,

Fred, if you can help me identify Jeff, OK, Otherwise I want nothing to do with you either. Jeff, you're going to spend some money this time. I hope you are using your real name.

ragingbull.altavista.com

=====

By: Jeff.Mitchell $$$
Reply To: 2779 by aceinvestor10 $$$ Friday, 22 Sep 2000 at 1:16 AM EDT
Post # of 2782


Now, now, calm down. Take a few deep breaths. Open a window. Take a walk. Your health is much more important than a few dollars.

As for Mr. Wisenbaker, no one is accusing him of anything "illegal" or "uncommon". Several people have just asked who he was and why he got 1.5 million shares, that's it. You aren't going to sue those people as well are you?

BTW, how did you happen to come across the "financial and stock arrangements" given to Mr. Wisenbaker? This, as far as I know, is not public information. What other non-public information about CCCX do you also possess?

- Jeff

ragingbull.altavista.com

=====

By: aceinvestor10 $$$
Reply To: 2782 by Jeff.Mitchell $$$ Friday, 22 Sep 2000 at 1:22 AM EDT
Post # of 2785


Don't worry about my health, worry about your own. We came across it from your distorted postings. Everything about his dealings with the company are recorded. See you in AZ. Till then, just shut up. Post the time you'd like to meet us there.

ragingbull.altavista.com

=====

- Jeff