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.
Gold/Mining/Energy
Canada Carbon CCB-V
An SI Board Since November 2013
Posts SubjectMarks Bans Symbol
1871 87 17 CCB
Emcee:  stuffbug Type:  Moderated
Introduction Market Data Compact
Previous 25 | Next 25 | View Recent | Post Message
Go to reply# or date (mm/dd/yy):
ReplyMessage PreviewFromRecsPosted
271KABOOM!! Something brewing!?roadguy513-7/22/2015
270Yes, I find it interesting they would think I am under some special scrutiny lolthe Chief-7/22/2015
269chief, the clowns sure luv to make stuff up, don't they? Haven't you beestuffbug-7/22/2015
268Grumpy, It seems you are getting touchy Alllies....sensitive about your investmethe Chief-7/21/2015
267No posts have been removed of mine? Click thisthe Chief-7/21/2015
266"Hypo......hypo....hypo......you bash anyone talking ZEN and Tesla but thosGrumpyGus-7/21/2015
265Chief why do your SH posts keep getting removed? You know the ones with the resoalllies37/21/2015
264Great NR retraction yesterday. Little bit of poetic justice to see Ccb get slappGMPInvestor27/17/2015
263Actually, GMP, hearing you think it's not a buy is a strong endorsement forGrumpyGus-7/17/2015
262OSC has said that 2 recent news releases are "misleading" That is incrGMPInvestor17/17/2015
261This is a highly speculative play at best. No drill results for 2 years. HeavilyGMPInvestor17/17/2015
260Yes GMP thats great advice, you have a history of picking losers. You should stithe Chief-7/17/2015
259You think the ones who bought ZEN just before the first PEA are happy that theirroadguy513-7/17/2015
258If I owned Ccb I would worried about a few things. No defined resource at the tGMPInvestor27/17/2015
257Perhaps a second level review? Approved by the someone at the first level. Thenstuffbug-7/16/2015
256Actually it does not bode well for IIROC and OSC. They approved it yesterday, ththe Chief-7/16/2015
255I would rather have management that illuminates rather than one that obfuscates.stuffbug27/16/2015
254Nope, not buying what your trying to sell. This latest pull of a NR does not refhelo417/16/2015
253helo4, you are only 100% wrong? Who is trying to sell the sizzle without the ststuffbug27/16/2015
252From the chief... OSC/IIROC were given the letter from an end user. They approvhelo417/16/2015
251yes a clarification agreecbs12311-7/16/2015
250Too friggen funny to see how management stumbles along. Always trying to outdo ihelo417/16/2015
249Sorry cbs. I don't perform miraclesGrumpyGus17/16/2015
248Talk about jumping the gun. Maybe cbs12311 should retract his statement.roadguy51317/16/2015
247It is not a retraction, it is a clarification. Apparently CCB should not have usstuffbug27/16/2015
Previous 25 | Next 25 | View Recent | Post Message
Go to reply# or date (mm/dd/yy):
HomeMailHotSubjectMarksPeopleMarksKeepersSettings
Terms Of UseContact UsCopyright/IP PolicyPrivacy PolicyAbout UsFAQAdvertise on SI
© 2026 Knight Sac Media.  Data provided by Twelve Data, Alpha Vantage, and CityFALCON News