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.

   Strategies & Market TrendsAnthony @ Equity Investigations, Dear Anthony,

Previous 10 Next 10 
To: StockDung who wrote (103288)4/11/2008 5:03:41 PM
From: train_wreck
   of 122029
Those claims by Minkow appear more business related than fraud related. Why use the term fraud?

Share RecommendKeepReplyMark as Last Read

To: anniebonny who wrote (103284)4/11/2008 7:20:39 PM
From: anniebonny
   of 122029
Shane Traveller resigns as CFO of AERP

April 11, 2008 - 5:55 PM EDT

SOUTH JORDAN, UT, Apr 11, 2008 (MARKET WIRE via COMTEX) -- Aero Performance
Products, Inc. (PINKSHEETS: AERP), which operates Aero Exhaust, Inc., a world
leader in performance exhaust airflow technology and NASCAR Performance Partner,
today announced the resignation of Shane H. Traveller as interim chief financial
officer of the company.

Detailed information regarding the resignation will be included in a Current
Report on Form 8-K that will be filed with the Securities and Exchange

Aero's Chief Executive Officer Bryan Hunsaker will serve as interim chief
financial officer until such time as the company appoints a permanent CFO.

"Due to an issue Mr. Traveller has related to another public company, he has
chosen to resign, effective at the close of business today," commented Bryan
Hunsaker, chief executive officer of Aero Performance Products, Inc. "Mr.
Traveller felt the issue, while entirely unrelated to Aero, would hinder his
ability to fully perform his duties with the company. We fully support his
decision and wish him well in his future endeavors."

"Mr. Traveller's tenure as interim chief financial offic e r of Aero was always
intended to be an interim solution until the company was able to locate a
permanent CFO. The recent developments merely accelerated the timeline for
finding a permanent replacement. We still anticipate filing our Q1 report on
time and expect that it will not be affected by Mr. Traveller's resignation."

"We have been very busy lately tending to the activities of the company and look
forward to communicating these accomplishments to our shareholders in the near
future," Mr. Hunsaker added.

To sign up to receive information by email directly from whenever new press
releases, investor newsletters, SEC filings, and other written material is
issued, please visit

About Aero Performance Products, Inc.

Aero Performance Products, Inc. ( operates Aero
Exhaust, Inc., a world leader in performance exhaust airflow technology,
manufacturing a nd distributing the most technologically advanced muffler on the
market. Aero's product lines are built to the highest industry standards and
offer the consumer a lifetime warranty. Aero Exhaust has been issued U.S. and
Australian patents on its innovations and development in the exhaust industry,
and its mufflers are available worldwide through major retailers, mass merchant
centers, automotive aftermarket supply stores and wholesalers. Aero Exhaust
mufflers are an exclusive National Association for Stock Car Auto Racing
(NASCAR) Performance product and carry the prestigious NASCAR brand on product,
packaging and related media. NASCAR legend Rusty Wallace is the official
spokesperson for Aero Exhaust products. Additional information on Aero Exhaust's
products, race team, and motorsports ventures can be found on its corporate

Safe Harbor Statement: The statements in this release that relate to future
pl a ns, expectations, events, performance and the like are forward-looking
statements within the meaning of the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of
1995 and the Securities Exchange Act of 1934. Actual results or events could
differ materially from those described in the forward-looking statements due to
a variety of factors, including the lack of funding, inability to complete
required SEC filings, and others set forth in the Company's report on Form 10-K
for fiscal year 2007 filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission.


Gemini Financial Communications, Inc.

A. Beyer


Email Contact

Share RecommendKeepReplyMark as Last Read

To: StockDung who wrote (103286)4/11/2008 8:37:13 PM
From: train_wreck
   of 122029
Since when does a company announce that it plans on filing a lawsuit once it gets permission to do so? Karen Hinton sounds like she enjoys peddling garbage. She said they filed and then corrected it later - what's up with that.

If they don't get permission can Overstock sue them for manipulating the market since clearly the market changed on a non-filed lawsuit? Maybe Gradient is looking for a double bagger on the lawsuit, drop on the intent and then drop again on the actual filing.

Share RecommendKeepReplyMark as Last ReadRead Replies (1)

To: train_wreck who wrote (103294)4/12/2008 12:11:40 AM
From: Kevin Podsiadlik
   of 122029
Byrne asked for it. Literally: to Gradient Analytics and Rocker Partners: Where's the Countersuit You Threatened?

I suppose it wouldn't be out of character for Byrne to sue someone just for answering a question, but it's nothing I'd recommend.

Share RecommendKeepReplyMark as Last ReadRead Replies (1)

To: Kevin Podsiadlik who wrote (103295)4/12/2008 10:34:21 AM
From: train_wreck
   of 122029
No problem with Gradient counter-suing for libel. I just find it amusing that Hinton sends out the message to reporters that a lawsuit is filed, impacting the market in doing so, and then has to retract that comment because it was not actually filed.

You would think a professional such as Hinton would be able to wait until a lawsuit is filed to claim it was filed.

Share RecommendKeepReplyMark as Last ReadRead Replies (1)

To: train_wreck who wrote (103296)4/12/2008 2:15:26 PM
From: a-hole
   of 122029
Overstock should initiated another round of litigation claiming manipulation. Didn't the stock drop a point and a half?

If it were me, I would take them to the cleaners.

Share RecommendKeepReplyMark as Last Read

From: StockDung4/12/2008 3:53:38 PM
   of 122029
Libel is alleged Company targeted by Overstock to sue
Arizona research firm claims defamation by Utah-based retailer

By Steven Oberbeck
The Salt Lake Tribune
Salt Lake Tribune
Article Last Updated:04/11/2008 11:35:56 PM MDT Inc., the Utah-based Internet retailer that sells discounted brand-name merchandise, is facing a libel action by the research company that it is suing for allegedly driving down its share price.
Gradient Analytics Inc., of Scottsdale, Ariz., intends to file a counterclaim early next week in the legal dispute that will claim it was defamed by and its Chief Executive Patrick Byrne after it issued research reports that questioned the Utah company's financial performance.
"Public companies cannot have license to libel research firms and use litigation to retaliate against analysts who are critical of their business," said Gradient Chief Executive Brad Frost in a statement announcing the legal action. sued Gradient in 2005, claiming the research company issued false and misleading reports to help the New York Rocker Partners hedge fund profit from selling's stock short - a technique that gives investors and speculators a way to benefit when a company's share price declines.
A California state court judge, who is= overseeing the dispute, gave Gradient permission to file its legal actions as a counterclaim earlier this week. Gradient is now waiting only for the judge to sign the formal order clearing the way for the counterclaim to be filed with the court.
"We expect the order to be signed early next week," said Gradient spokeswoman Karen Hinton.
Jonathan Johnson,'s chief legal officer, however, said Gradient's action is "bogus" and something that will be beaten easily.
"Truth is a defense, and we can back up everything we've said about them."
Byrne was far less circumspect in his statements.
"These bullies have spent 2 1/2 years hiding in the locker room to avoid having to back up their words," Byrne said. "Now that they've been dragged by their heels kicking and screaming into the ring, they bounce up and begin pounding their chests." contends that Gradient colluded with the New York Rocker Partners hedge fund to drive down its share price from a high of $77.18 in January 2005. And it went on to claim Gradient's false and misleading reports damaged its reputation and made it more difficult for it to raise investment capital.
Yet in February 2007, after a 16-month investigation, the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission sent Gradient a letter stating that its own investigation had been closed without any enforcement actions recommended.
"We are strong believers in free speech," Frost said. "We believe our work serves an important function in the efficiencies and information flow in the equity markets. But the comments of Overstock and its CEO are of a different sort of flavor entirely."'s shares closed Friday at $13.16, up 35 cents for the day.

Share RecommendKeepReplyMark as Last Read

From: StockDung4/12/2008 4:04:32 PM
   of 122029
Lawsuit accuses Bear Stearns of fraud

A Beverly Hills billionaire says the firm, an employee and a broker misled him and his wife into buying stock as the company faltered.

By Thomas S. Mulligan and Tom Petruno, Los Angeles Times Staff Writers
April 12, 2008

Beverly Hills billionaire H. Roger Wang has accused Bear Stearns Cos. of duping him and his wife into buying 150,000 shares of the struggling brokerage's stock -- including 100,000 shares on March 14, the day that federal officials first intervened to keep the firm from tumbling into bankruptcy.

The lawsuit is one of many legal actions spawned by the near-collapse of the venerable Wall Street firm. Wang, who operates high-end retail stores in China, is seeking $10 million in damages.

The suit, filed Thursday, claims that Wang and his wife agreed to pay $6.56 million for the stock at prices ranging from $71.96 to $33.44 a share from March 6 to March 14.

Wang says Bear on March 18 illegally liquidated the account that held the stock after Wang and his wife refused to send in unpaid balances on their orders.

The liquidation value of the stock, according to the suit: $947,324 after expenses, or $6.32 a share.

The complaint, filed in Los Angeles County Superior Court, alleges fraud and breach of fiduciary duty. It names as defendants Bear Stearns, broker Joey Zhou and Garrett Bland, a senior managing director in Bear's Century City office.

Neither Zhou nor Bland returned calls for comment Friday. A spokesman at Bear Stearns' New York headquarters declined to comment.

The 59-year-old Wang, who has a net worth of $1.3 billion by Forbes magazine's reckoning, grew up in Taiwan and immigrated to the U.S. in 1971. In 1992, early in China's boom, he founded a real estate development firm called Golden Eagle International Group in the city of Nanjing. The centerpiece of his empire now is department stores.

Golden Eagle generated more than $1 billion in revenue last year, and analysts who follow the company say it has strong cash flow and is looking for merger and acquisition opportunities. Even so, Golden Eagle's stock, traded in Hong Kong, has languished in a lackluster market.

Wang, who has a home in Beverly Hills, spends about five months each year in the U.S. and the rest of the time in China. He couldn't immediately be reached for comment about the lawsuit.

In the suit, Wang says that he and his wife, Vivine, became customers of Bear in 1993 and that Zhou became their broker.

In February, the suit says, Roger Wang decided he wanted to buy shares of San Marino-based East West Bancorp. Vivine Wang called Zhou, according to the suit, and the broker set up an account in her name to use for the stock purchases. The suit doesn't explain why a new account was needed.

Roger Wang bought 50,000 shares of East West from March 3 to March 6. And beginning March 6, the suit says, he also started buying shares in Bear, and continued to do so even as rumors began to hit Wall Street that the company was having funding problems.

On March 11, according to the suit, Wang went to a lunch meeting at Bear's Century City office. The suit alleges that Bland told Wang that "Bear Stearns was financially sound, that its stock value should be at least $85 per share, and that now was a great time to invest in the stock."

On Friday, March 14, while Bear stock was plummeting from $57 to $30 amid rumors that it might fail, Wang put in an order to buy an additional 200,000 shares, relying in part on Bland's "favorable recommendations," the suit says.

Amid the day's wild trading, Wang -- who says he was scheduled to fly out of the country that day and was unaware of the latest news on Bear -- got just 100,000 shares.

Two days later Bear agreed to an emergency buyout by JPMorgan Chase & Co. at $2 a share, a price later raised to about $10.

Wang says when he learned of the "devastating news" of the buyout price, he refused to pay for his final orders of Bear stock. The brokerage, he alleges, then liquidated the account March 18 "without any authority, right or consent."

The Wangs allege that Zhou, Bland and other unnamed defendants "concealed highly relevant information about Bear Stearns, including specifically its extremely poor and disastrous financial condition."

Wang also says Bear Stearns wrongly provided him and his wife "with standardized paperwork that incorrectly purported to assert that Bear Stearns was not providing the Wangs with any investment advice." The suit does not say whether the Wangs signed the forms.

Wang's lawyer, William A. Stahr of Santa Ana, did not return calls for comment. It was not clear why Wang went to court because brokerage customers typically agree to handle disputes in arbitration.

thomas.mulligan@ Times staff writer Don Lee in Shanghai contributed to this report.

Share RecommendKeepReplyMark as Last Read

From: anniebonny4/12/2008 6:49:46 PM
   of 122029
Accounting - Shane Traveller style....

search Sequoia International

An example of what is happening - from AERP 10Q filings:

On November 7, 2007, the Company agreed to a court-ordered settlement for payment on services previously rendered by a director of the Company valued at $80,000. The director had previously sold the services contract to a third party who then sought payment and brought an action against the Company in the 12th Circuit Court in Sarasota, Florida. Under the terms of the settlement, the Company issued a total of 72,700,000 shares of common stock. As a result, the Company recorded settlement costs of $318,850 which represented the difference between the fair value of the shares issued and the value of the debt obligation.

Now bear in mind many of the companies listed in those lawsuits in Florida do business with Javelin Advisory Group. Shane Traveller at one time (still?) was 50% owner of Javelin.
There is a well connected group that have been playing a game of rotating CEO through numerous r/m they have arranged.

Since the shares are not restricted you can only imagine what typically happens - Dilution and r/s.
Is there such a thing as a friendly win win lawsuit? Except that shareholders are not part of the win win?
I am not an accountant - but does this seem right???

Share RecommendKeepReplyMark as Last ReadRead Replies (1)

To: anniebonny who wrote (103300)4/12/2008 11:09:01 PM
From: anniebonny
   of 122029
Search Sequoia International

I think that was a bad link before:

Share RecommendKeepReplyMark as Last Read
Previous 10 Next 10