Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

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 : Plastics to Oil - Pyrolysis and Secret Catalysts and Alterna -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: old 'n cranky who wrote (21780)	4/5/2012 2:24:58 PM
From: SteveF	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 53574

I suspect that you disagreed with my post based on no research at all. I'm not sure how long you've been following JBII but I'm comfortable saying nobody with the exception of Scion has researched this company more than I have (a fact I'm not especially proud of, by the way). I didn't claim you were wrong, only that I disagreed. Your guess is as good as mine - both are plausible.

To: old 'n cranky who wrote (21780)	4/5/2012 2:38:35 PM
From: scion	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 53574

I believe the SEC people writing to 310/JBI, including the aptly named Mr Edgar, were well aware of the problems with Gately long before 9/28/10, don't you think? The audits performed by Gately will include financial statements audited or reviewed by Moore and filed with the Commission previously and shall be applicable to future filings. ANSLOW & JACLIN, LLP By: /s/ Gary S. Eaton GARY S. EATON October 8, 2009 Form CORRESP Filing Date 2009-10-09 http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1381105/000121390009002760/filename1.htm "Only 4 of those pre-date the 9/28/10 to which I referred and none of them have squat to do with anything that might have triggered the May 2010 JBI 8-K that indicated that the 2 financial statements in question should no longer be relied upon."