On August 14, 2019 the SEC settled with Canaccord Genuity over violations of Rule 15C2-11. The firm agreed to change its deficient procedures and pay a civil monetary penalty of $250,000. Read the order (pdf).
Violations of 15c2-11 are at issue in the recent SEC lawsuit against broker and market maker Spartan Securities. Also, the SEC recently proposed changing rule 15c2-11 to make it harder for firms that are not current on filing financials to be quoted by brokers.
Canaccord delegated to a compliance associate the responsibility to obtain and review the information required by Rule 15c2-11 and to fill out and sign the Form 211s, including placing the electronic signature of the designated principal on the filings. The compliance associate had no trading experience and no formal training to conduct the review required by the rule, such as training related to the analysis of financial statements and other information.
the compliance associate generally placed the electronic signature of the designated principal on Canaccord’s Form 211 filings without having a reasonable basis to believe that the representations were accurate. In addition, the compliance associate generally understood that the firm’s designated principal had not actually examined the form prior to its submission.
While Rule 15c2-11 files were maintained within the compliance department by the compliance associate, the files could not be independently accessed by the traders or the firm’s designated principal without requesting them from the compliance department. During the relevant period, the traders who intended to make a market in the security rarely, if ever, obtained or reviewed the required information contemplated under the Rule and Canaccord’s policies and procedures, and the firm’s designated principal rarely, if ever, reviewed or signed the Form 211s
Yesterday just before the market open the SEC announced a trading suspension in the shares of Canal Capital (OTC: COWP and OTC: COWPP). Canal Capital had run up from under 1 cent to over $0.50 in under a month before falling in the days preceding the trading suspension.
concerns about the adequacy of information in the marketplace about the company’s operations and operating status, if any, and due to recent potentially manipulative trading in the company’s stock.
The suspension order gives more detail and relates this action to the SEC’s recent spate of suspensions of trading in companies that have been delinquent in reporting to the SEC:
Canal Capital was a Delaware corporation with its principal executive offices purportedly located in Port Jefferson Station, New York. Canal Capital’s last filing with the Commission was a Form 15 purporting to suspend its duty to file reports with the Commission on December 6, 2012. However, due to the number of shareholders of record indicated on the Form 15, Canal Capital was not eligible to suspend its duty to file reports with the Commission under Sections 13 and 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (“Exchange Act”). Canal Capital filed for dissolution with the Delaware Secretary of State, effective September 26, 2013.
On October 23, 2019 BNP Paribas Securities Corp. agreed to a $15 million fine and censure from FINRA for failings relating in part to accepting penny stock shares for deposit and liquidation. The 13-page Acceptance, Waiver, and Consent (AWC) (pdf) makes for some fun reading. Readers of this blog will be used to reports of fines from FINRA and the SEC for brokers that fail to do proper due diligence before allowing the liquidation of large blocks of shares of penny stocks or fail to file Suspicious Activity Reports (SARs), but the failings outlined in this AWC are among the worst I have seen in recent memory.
Following are excerpts from the AWC showing BNP Paribus’ failings with regard to penny stocks:
… BNP did not implement any systems or written procedures (“WSPs”) to determine whether resales of securities complied with Section 5’s registration requirements, even though a substantial portion of its business involved liquidating restricted shares of penny stocks deposited in certificated form.
As a result, BNP allowed the deposit of nearly 31 billion shares of penny stocks, with a notional value of approximately $338 million, without any review to determine whether the shares were restricted, qualified for an exemption from registration, held by control persons of the issuer, or otherwise eligible for re-sale. BNP also facilitated the removal of restrictive legends from 33.5 million shares of securities, with a total notional value of approximately $12.5 million, without conducting any review to determine whether the legends were eligible for removal.
It isn’t just that the review prior to removal of restricted legends was inadequate but that there was no review! Likewise, surveillance of penny stock transactions was not just inadequate — for a long time, there was no surveillance:
It did not conduct any surveillance targeting penny stock transactions, or transactions in securities trading outside of the traditional exchanges, until early 2016
Next, take a look at BNP’s failures to identify red flags that might have triggered the filing of SARs:
Because of these deficiencies in its AML Program, BNP did not identify red flags of potentially suspicious activity that may have required the filing of a suspicious activity report (“SAR”). For example, during the Relevant Period, BNP: • did not identify 14 customer accounts that executed zero buy transactions while selling approximately 1 billion shares of low priced securities for proceeds of approximately $3.5 million; • did not identify multiple accounts in which known toxic debt financiers engaged in sales of penny stocks representing more than 20% to 80% of the trading volume on the sale dates and involving securities that were the subject of negative news or suspicious promotional campaigns; and • did not review at least 3,448 foreign currency wires representing a total value of more than $2.5 billion USD to determine whether they involved high-risk entities or jurisdictions, or represented the proceeds of potentially suspicious trading activity.
A retroactive review of penny stock transactions from April 2013 to April 2016 “identified more than one hundred instances where BNP did not reasonably detect and investigate potentially suspicious penny stock transactions that may have required the filing of a SAR.”
The AWC gives examples of suspicious wire transfer patterns that BNP did not review:
• 34 customer accounts that, during the period of February 2013 to May 2015, received more than 18 billion restricted shares of penny stocks and incoming wires totaling $40,344, while sending 220 outgoing wires that totaled more than $62 million during a 23-month period; and • 44 customer accounts that, during the same period, executed zero buy transactions while depositing more than 17.8 billion shares of penny stock and wiring out more than $69 million in sale proceeds.
BNP Paribus was also slow to fix its problems even after they were identified internally:
In January 2014, the head of BNP’s Trading Operations advised senior management that BNP was “an outlier in the industry” in terms of its surveillance of microcap securities and recommended that BNP develop and implement specific policies, procedures and controls for penny stocks. In February 2014, BNP personnel raised additional concerns with BNP’s penny stock business and due diligence process after reviewing recent AML regulatory actions.
BNP did not act in a timely manner to address the deficiencies its personnel identified. BNP did not implement procedures relating to penny stocks or enhanced due diligence for physical certificates until March 2015, more than one year after the head of its Trading Operations identified the need.
In addition to the fine, BNP Paribus Securities Corp also consented to the imposition of a censure and a requirement to get its procedures up to an acceptable level within 90 days. I am actually a little surprised that BNP Paribus Securities Corp did not also exit the penny stock deposit business like Cor Clearing did in the wake of an SEC settlement a year ago.
On October 21, 2019 a criminal complaint (pdf) against Michael Starkweather, former CEO of Andiamo Corp (OTC: ANDI), was unsealed in US District Court for the Eastern District of New York. The case is United States v. Starkweather (1:19-mj-00911). See the case docket. I previously reported on the SEC’s lawsuit against Starkweather and predicted criminal charges were coming. As the case has just been filed these are only allegations and have not been proven in a court of law.
Mike Caswell of StockWatch already wrote a good summary of the charges (though without linking to the complaint).
Excerpt from complaint / affidavit (do note that I had to OCR the complaint so that may have introduced errors):
I . The Defendant, the Publicly-Traded Company and Co-Conspirators 4. The defendant MICHAEL STARKWEATHER was a United States citizen who resided in North Ridgeville. Ohio. In or about and between November 2017 and September 2018. STARKWEATHER was Chief Executive Officer (“CEO”) of the Andiamo Corporation. 5. The Andiamo Corporation was a microcap or penny stock company whose shares traded publicly on the over-the-counter exchange under the ticker symbol ANDI (“ANDI”). In public statements that it issued at various times, ANDI purported to be involved in various businesses, as described in part below: (a) In or about and between April 2016 and September 2016, ANDI purportedly entered into a joint venture with Peppermint Jim. a company in the business of marketing pure mint and essential oils, to help Peppermint Jim expand its business. (b) In or about and between November 2016 and March 2017, ANDI purported to enter into the energy sector, whereby ANDI would create an on-demand hydrogen-producing unit designed to increase performance, reduce emissions and lower the cost of operations for vehicles. (c) In or about and between November 2017 and June 2018, ANDI, through a merger with Utopya Innovations. Inc., purportedly began to develop a smartphone cellular device. 6. Cooperating Witness #1 (“CW #1”) was a stock promoter. In May 2016. CW # 1 pled guilty to conspiracy to commit securities fraud, in violation of Title 18. United States Code, Section 1349. pursuant to a cooperation agreement with the government. 7. Co-Conspirator # 1 (“CC #1”) was a former ANDI executive. Subsequent to the events described in this complaint. Co-Conspirator # 1 pled guilty to conspiracy to commit securities fraud, in violation of Title 18, United States Code, Section 371. pursuant to a cooperation agreement with the government.
Yet again we see the importance of cooperating witnesses in white collar criminal cases and here we have two cooperating witnesses (Co-Conspirator #1 and Cooperating Witness #1).
Further excerpt from the complaint:
17. In or about June 2018, STARKWEATHER met with C’C # 1 in Ohio to discuss the smartphone and STARKWEATHER told C’C # 1 that there was currently no smartphone. 18. In approximately November 2018, after the defendant MICHAEL STARKWEATIIER stepped down as CEO of ANDI, CC # 1 became CEO of ANDI. At that time, CC # 1 confirmed that no Utopya or Andiamo smartphone existed. 19. On February 28. 2019. the defendant MICHAEL STARKWEATHER met with CC # 1. The meeting was consensually recorded by CC # 1. During this meeting, CC # 1 told STARKWEATHER, “There is no phone there is no physical phones [sic] that I can sell right now.” STARKWEATHER replied: “There never was. What there was the ability for you to place an order for them [Utopya] to be the middleman. It always was a middleman scenario with software, but the software never got built. We paid Cycloids [the software company] and they never did anything. They never built anything…. They never built anything for us.” During that same conversation. CC # 1 stated. “I need a real phone that can be sold.” STARKWEATHER replied: “You’re not going to get one because it doesn’t exist until somebody puts in an order…. You have to put in an order before a real phone exists…. [T]hey [Utopya] have no money to pay for them to do the chip change over there, for the radio. They don’t have the money to pay for the radio….” B. The Defendant MICHAEL STARKWEATHER received kickbacks from the purported sales of ANDI stock at artificially inflated prices 20. On or about January 18. 2018. the defendant MICHAEL STARKWEATHER met with CW # 1. The meeting had been arranged by CC # 1. and was consensually recorded by CW # 1. During the meeting, CW # 1 stated that he wanted to convert his ANDI notes into ANDI shares of common stock, and that STARKWEATHER needed to approve the conversion. STARKWEATHER told CW # 1 that if he sold such shares “profitably,” STARKWEATHER wanted “some sort of kickback” in return. STARKWEATHER later added that he wanted 50% of CW # 1’s profits and that STARKWEATHER could then “keep this thing [ANDI’s stock price] moving or at least hovering where it is now.
On August 22, 2019 the SEC filed suit against William White, former CEO of Andiamo Corp’s (OTC: ANDI) for allegedly arranging for a stock promoter to receive discounted shares in exchange for a kickback. On September 30, 2019 the SEC filed suit against Michael J. Starkweather and Andiamo Corporation or issuing an allegedly false press release and receiving a kickback from a stock promoter. The SEC put out a press release about the suits last week. For a good overview of the second case, read Mike Caswell’s article on Stockwatch (free registration required to view the whole article).
Both cases are in the Eastern District of New York. The case dockets are below:
The White complaint (pdf) alleges misdeeds that happened between June and November 2016, when William White was CEO of Andiamo Corp. From the SEC complaint:
1. From at least June through November 2016 (the “Relevant Period”), White—then the chief executive officer of Andiamo Corporation (“Andiamo”), a penny stock issuer—arranged for a stock promoter (the “Promoter”) to obtain millions of shares of Andiamo stock at a large discount so that the Promoter could make lucrative, manipulative trades and kick back a substantial portion of the profits to White.
2. Specifically, from June through October 2016, after the Promoter told White he planned to engage in pre-arranged matched trading with a buyer (the “Matched Buyer”) and agreed to give White half of the Promoter’s profits from those trades, White arranged for the Promoter to obtain at least 66 million shares of Andiamo common stock at a significant discount from the market price.
3. From July through November 2016, the Promoter engaged in eleven matched trades to sell over two million of these Andiamo shares to the Matched Buyer in pre-arranged transactions that created the false appearance of high-volume trading at inflated prices.
4. In exchange for White’s assistance, the Promoter paid White a significant portion of the Promoter’s profits from his matched trades.
Besides the Promoter and White, the complaint against White also mentions a “Matched Buyer” who worked with the Promoter to manipulate the stock using matched trades.
The more recent complaint (pdf) against Michael J. Starkweather and Andiamo Corporation alleges that they put out a false press release in April 2018. It was easy enough at the time to spot the problems with the press release and the company; see for example this insanely detailed research posted on the InvestorsHub message board on April 6, 2018 by pseudonymous researcher NoDummy. According to the SEC complaint:
The press release announced the “unveiling” of a smartphone Andiamo had purportedly developed, touted the phone’s technical features, and claimed that the phone was “available” for distribution. In reality, as Starkweather knew and later admitted, the purported smartphone did not exist: Andiamo had not actually had any such smartphone manufactured.
2. In the months leading up to this false press release, Starkweather and Andiamo issued four press releases touting the purported smartphone’s development in order to pique investor interest in Andiamo and its purportedly forthcoming smartphone. During this prior press release campaign, Starkweather sought and received “kickbacks,” as he called them, totaling over $15,000 from a stock promoter. These kickbacks supposedly represented a portion of the stock promoter’s profits from selling Andiamo shares during this press release campaign.
3. The false press release, which was the culmination of the preceding press release campaign, caused the volume of trading in Andiamo stock to triple and the stock price to increase.
The allegedly false press release gave many details about the phone:
The Utopya Odyssey is the first smartphone to be unveiled in the Company’s product lineup. This 4G smartphone features an incredible 4950 mAh battery, a beautiful 6″ FHD 18:9 display, dual SIM card functionality, up to 192 GB storage capacity, a 16 MP rear camera and 16 MP front camera, and 4 GB of RAM. The Androidbased Device also comes equipped with facial unlock technology and a fingerprint sensor for added user security.
Starkweather would later reveal to the subsequent CEO of Andiamo Corp, “There is no phone—there is no physical phones [sic] that I can sell right now .”
I believe there is a possibility that criminal complaints may yet be filed against the above-named defendants, considering that the SEC thanked the US Attorney’s Office from EDNY and the FBI in the press release about the lawsuits (“The SEC appreciates the assistance of the United States Attorney’s Office for the Eastern District of New York and the FBI.”). Of course it is also possible that the USAO and FBI investigated but decided that only civil charges were warranted. It is possible that the promoter mentioned in the complaints has been acting as a cooperating witness for the FBI in other cases and then gave the FBI information about Andiamo that was then forwarded to the SEC. This would also explain why the promoter was not charged in these cases. One last note — there is no information in the SEC press release or in the complaints that indicates whether the stock promoter in each case was the same or if they were different people.
The most recent batch of promoted stocks to get the Caveat Emptor designation includes ESYL and PXPP on 10/7:
ESYL (Easylink Solutions Corp) was an uncompensated promotion by numerous promoters including MJ Capital (MomentumOTC.com), James Connelly (PennyStockProphet.com), Stock News Wire LLC (SmallCapFirm.com / FierceInvestor.com / StockWireNews.net), and likely others that I did not see.
PXPP (Phoenix Apps inc) was a promotion by a group connected to the defunct AwesomePennyStocks, referrred to as the “Tier 1” group by OTC Market Research. As you can tell from the chart below, the stock has continued to climb after being designated Caveat Emptor. They are the only promoters in the last year whose pumps have not all dropped following Caveat Emptor designation. They have been advertising aggressively recently; this promotion was via an older website, not the ones they are currently advertising.
Two other relatively recent stocks to be gifted the Caveat Emptor designation were HPMM (Hemp Naturals Inc) and SMPP (Strategic Management & Opportunity Corp).
HPMM closed at $0.20 just prior to it being designated Caveat Emptor on 8/26. The next day it closed at $0.13125.
SMPP gapped down from $0.712 to $0.53 and then closed at $0.25 on 8/7 the day after it was designated Caveat Emptor:
One of my favorite trades is shorting a stock when the stock spikes on news from a similarly-named company. This is a rare event, but it is quite enjoyable and I have written about it when it happened to Riviera Tool Corp and Jetcom / Jet.com. A couple similar situations were Nestor Therapeutics / Nest Inc and Tweeter / Twitter. However, this is usually something that happens to illiquid OTC stocks. It appears that something like this just happened with a Nasdaq-traded contingent value right (CVR) relating to Celgene.
Basically, a CVR is a security issued by a company that is acquiring another company (usually a biotech) that will pay out if something good happens (usually drug approval). In this case, Charley Grant wrote a column for The Wall Street Journal that was bullish on a certain Celgene CVR that would pay out if three of its drugs in late-stage development got approved. That CVR was not yet assigned a ticker. Instead, a different CVR with the ticker CELGZ relating to Abraxane (from the merger of Abraxis and Celgene years ago) spiked 100% in two days starting the day the column was published and on the third day it lost all those gains.
The spike in CELGZ didn’t take it to an absurd value — it was higher back in March — but considering the timing and the volume it is almost certain that people bought the wrong CVR in response to Grant’s column. I checked Google News and I found no news for Abraxane around September 24th. Unfortunately, I did not trade CELGZ (even though it was available to short for about $0.006 per share at Centerpoint Securities on the day it dropped big). Oops.
Once again, thanks to Twitter and one of the smart traders I follow on Twitter for pointing all this out, as shown in the tweets below:
Charley Grant tweet:
Here was the response from a trader I respect and follow:
There are a lot of smart traders on Twitter and one of the best ways to find them is to look at who the smart people follow. Start by seeing who I follow:
Seven years ago I thought to put out more detailed research on certain pump and dump scams on a separate blog at OTCMicrocapResearch.com. After a handful of highly-researched posts I got distracted and stopped. I am now giving up that domain name and shutting down that website. Below is a copy of one of those posts. The article below was originally published on 19 December 2012.
This is the first article in a series I am calling “Inside the Pump Factory.” These articles will show how a series of companies have been promoted in a way that appears to me to require the complicity of company executives. For this reason I am initiating coverage on Aristocrat Group Corp. (and will soon initiate coverage on other companies promoted by the same stock promoters). My rating on Aristocrat Group is Strong Sell and I have a medium-term (over the next few months but within a year) price target of $0.10, although the stock should eventually go much lower. I believe that Aristocrat Group is being promoted by the same stock promoters that promoted First Titan Energy (OTCBB: FTTN), GTSO Resources (OTCBB: GTSO) and Rainbow Biosciences (OTCBB: RBCC). After a brief review of Aristocrat Group’s fundamentals and a description of the current stock promotion on it, I will return to prove the connection between these companies.
As far as any fundamental analysis of Aristocrat Group goes, it is pitifully easy. With 62,250,000 shares outstanding and a recent stock price of $1.50, the company has a market capitatlization of $93 million. The company has total assets of $1,243 as of July 31st (per their recent 10-K) and liabilities of $9,118. I know high school students with more impressive balance sheets. What is the company doing with its pitifully small amount of money? At first, it looks like it must be buying advertisements on Yahoo! Below is a screenshot of an advertisement I saw for it today.
(highlighting of the ASCC advertisement added by me; click image to enlarge)
The link takes you to the company’s investor relations page, or more specifically, http://www.luxuriabrands.com/investors?utm_source=MSN&utm_medium=CPC&utm_term=Company&utm_content=NewsAd122&utm_campaign=ASCC.
Unlike most online stock promotion advertisements, the link does not take you to a stock promoter’s website but rather to the company’s website. So this is why it seems that the company is paying for the stock promotion ads. The Luxuria Brands website is very slick and very promotional. Take a look at this image below that I took from the website’s Investors page:
I have seen companies pay for stock promotion campaigns before, and I have seen stock promoters paid by companies issue outrageous price targets. But I cannot remember ever having seen a company touting itself so blatantly on its own website.
From the same page:
ASCC’s Proprietary Formula Could Turn $5000 into $50,000 ASCC is on target to producing smooth, unflavored vodka that uses domestically-grown potatoes as its main ingredient—integral in appealing to consumers with allergies to certain grains. The market demand for our gluten-free vodka could boost investor gains by 400% or more! Luxuria Brands is working to promote national market modernization trends in product branding beginning with an American-made premium vodka line, while helping to spur economic prosperity within the U.S. ASCC will expand into the music industry, branding in-demand products on a global scale! As vodka’s popularity continues to spike, consumers and investors are likely to reap very high ROIs in the first few months of production.
While all companies like to accentuate the positive, I must repeat that I have not previously seen such direct references to the stock price (rather than the actual business). What is worse is that the company makes specific predictions about their stock price (“… could boost investor gains by 400% or more”), and about their business performance (saying that they are “poised to capture 3-5%” of the vodka market, an outrageous prediction).
Even PacWest Equities, which rightly drew my ire for many failings, did not make specific and absurd predictions about market share that they would take and price gains that the stock would see. But all this, while highly irregular and inappropriate, misses the more important point. That point is that the company cannot be paying for these ads — it does not have enough cash and has disclosed nothing in its filings about paying for “investor relations” or “stock promotion” services. A quick search of Aristocrat Group’s most recent 10-K revealed no usage of either phrase. Furthermore, the recent 10-K shows that all expenses were under “general and administrative” expenses; stock promotion would not be considered a G&A expense. That brings me to a sinister conclusion: the company is acting in concert with the stock promoters. There is no other logical conclusion that I can think of, especially considering that the company’s two websites are on the same server as the websites of other companies pumped via the same method that I mentioned above (search the YouGetSignal reverse IP tool for the company’s luxuriabrands.com and aristocratgroupcorp.com websites and you find that they are hosted on the same server as the corporate websites of RBCC and FTTN and GTSO and many other penny stock companies).
See this screenshot:
As mentioned above, First Titan Energy and Rainbow Biosciences have been promoted in the same manner, via online ads. At least one of the companies, Rainbow Biosciences (OTCBB: RBCC) is still being promoted in the same fashion. I cannot confirm that the other companies whose websites show up above were promoted in the same manner but I believe that to be the case. (One important aside: large websites like bhphotovideo.com, nextag.com, shopzilla.com, and bizrate.com are often hosted across many different servers and IPs, and I can safely state that they have no relationship with the other websites shown above.) Below is a screenshot of a search on Bing that yielded a Rainbow Biosciences advertisement:
(highlighting of the RBCC advertisement added by me; click image to enlarge)
I find this direct link between all these companies’ official websites and online stock promotion ads to be quite disturbing. Are the executives of all these companies cooperating with the stock promoters? Are all these companies put together and run from behind the scenes by a small cabal of deal-makers and promoters for the sole purpose of being pumped and dumped? While I believe one of these explanations must be true, extraordinary claims demand extraordinary evidence, which I will aim to provide in future articles in this series. In the meantime, I recommend that investors steer clear of all of these promoted, worthless companies.
Disclosure: It is the policy of MorningLightMountain LLC for no authors of articles nor anyone connected to the company or their immediate relatives to have positions in any stocks covered on the OTCMicroCapResearch.com website, from the time coverage is initiated until coverage of a company is officially dropped. This ensures that there will be no bias nor conflicts of interest for the authors of articles on this website. Furthermore, information about upcoming research reports will not be given to anyone prior to public notice being given via this website’s Twitter account or on this website itself (this report was published on Wednesday, December 19th, at 1:58pm EST). OTCMicroCapResearch.com never gets paid to analyze companies.
Seven years ago I thought to put out more detailed research on certain pump and dump scams on a separate blog at OTCMicrocapResearch.com. After a handful of highly-researched posts I got distracted and stopped. I am now giving up that domain name and shutting down that website. Below is a copy of one of those posts. The article below was originally published on 12 November 2012.
PacWest Equiteis (Pinksheets: PWEID) released yet another press release today, this time about a distribution agreement its World Eco Source subsidiary has with K. Hill Livestock. There are still no details on K. Hill Livestock and none of the press releases have had a quote from anyone at K. Hill Livestock. Does the company exist? I do not believe so, as I stated in my second report on PacWest Equities — there is no evidence that K. Hill Livestock exists outside of PacWest Equities’ press releases. Like I said before, I could be wrong, but considering everything else that is sketchy about the company (that I detailed in that report), I believe nothing they say unless there is proof. Below is the full press release (except for the legal boilerplate):
November 12, 2012 10:10 ET PacWest Equities, Inc. to Team With K. Hill Livestock for Distribution Rights for Hawaii in a Deal Worth up to $12 Million US in Annual Sales LAS VEGAS, NV–(Marketwire – Nov 12, 2012) – PacWest Equities, Inc. (PINKSHEETS: PWEID) through its subsidiary, World Eco Source Corp. (“WES”), announced today the signing of a Teaming Agreement with K. Hill Livestock as an exclusive dealer for the state of Hawaii for WES’ proprietary MobileFeed® and MobileFood® units. Both parties involved recognize the demand for a sustainable economical and reliable feed source for not only livestock, but also for human inhabitants on the under developed areas of rural Hawaii. The units will be shipped to Kawaihae Harbor and distributed from Kailua-Kona, HI. “We see tremendous growth potential throughout all of the Pacific Islands including US territories of Samoa and Saipan, where populations and livestock are heavily dependent on import of goods,” stated Mr. Geoffrey Bagatelos, President of PacWest Equities, Inc. He added, “Hawaii has limited resources available for large scale feeding operations that force the import of expensive feed stock, and this agreement will allow for ample amount of feed to supply a large herd and stabilize fluctuating expenses of import due to volatile fuel costs.” The World Eco Source MobileFeed® and MobileFood® units provide turnkey systems for either the production of livestock based consumables or human based protein and vegetable consumables. The MobileFeed® units are truly a sustainable green life cycle farming system. Using solar powered and water conservation growing systems, one trailer can produce 1500 pounds daily of organically grown grass for year round livestock consumption, lowering feed costs by 200% while producing Certified Organic, Grass Fed livestock, increasing profitability of the final product. The MobileFood® units enable the rapid production of certified organic vegetables and proteins for humans through life cycle harmonic integration of fish farms and hydroponic vegetables, with one half of the system feeding/fertilizing the other half, and vice versa. Growing tilapia side by side with vegetables, and using the same water from the fish to fertilize the greens is not something new, but by combining the hydroponic know-how with World Eco Source patented technologies, the outputs have finally become commercially feasible.
And as usual with PacWest Equities’ press releases, the above release has no details about anything else — price, where the units were manufactured, what kind of inventory K. Hill will hold, what kind of vendor financing may be provided to buyers, etc. I am very skeptical of everything PacWest Equities says. I continue to have a strong sell rating on the stock with a sub-penny target price.
Disclosure: It is the policy of MorningLightMountain LLC for no authors of articles nor anyone connected to the company or their immediate relatives to have positions in any stocks covered on the OTCMicroCapResearch.com website, from the time coverage is initiated until coverage of a company is officially dropped. This ensures that there will be no bias nor conflicts of interest for the authors of articles on this website. Furthermore, information about upcoming research reports will not be given to anyone prior to public notice being given via this website’s Twitter account or on this website itself (this report was published on Wednesday, November 12th, at 11:43am EST). OTCMicroCapResearch.com never gets paid to analyze companies.
Seven years ago I thought to put out more detailed research on certain pump and dump scams on a separate blog at OTCMicrocapResearch.com. After a handful of highly-researched posts I got distracted and stopped. I am now giving up that domain name and shutting down that website. Below is a copy of one of those posts. The article below was originally published on 7 November 2012.
On Monday night PacWest Equities (Pinksheets: PWEID) released a press release touting the great sales gains made by their PurGro Electronics subsidiary. The company continues to show a complete and utter disregard for investors by publishing only the most positive information and failing to give out any other information. The press release states in part:
3rd Quarter Sales for its wholly owned subsidiary, PurGro Electronics, showed a 430% increase in sales over 3rd quarter results for 2011, following the consistent sales growth trends set in the previous two quarters.
What were the sales? What were the prior months’ sales? How many shares were issued to purchase PurGro Electronics LLC? We have no clue — yet still the stock goes up. At a recent price of $0.68 that gives the company a $1.3 billion market cap (using my estimate of 500,000,000 post-split shares issued to pay for PurGro). The stock promotion of PacWest Equities has grown larger — I received an email this morning from “The Penny Stock Pillager,” which has published pump mailers for past pump and dumps, disclosing $300,000 in compensation to promote PacWest Equities. See the disclaimer online here or below:
Disclosure: It is the policy of MorningLightMountain LLC for no authors of articles nor anyone connected to the company or their immediate relatives to have positions in any stocks covered on the OTCMicroCapResearch.com website, from the time coverage is initiated until coverage of a company is officially dropped. This ensures that there will be no bias nor conflicts of interest for the authors of articles on this website. Furthermore, information about upcoming research reports will not be given to anyone prior to public notice being given via this website’s Twitter account or on this website itself (this report was published on Wednesday, November 5th, at 1:34pm EST). OTCMicroCapResearch.com never gets paid to analyze companies.