|
Post by wolfbela on May 1, 2011 9:27:47 GMT -5
This is the difference between Hollenegg and myself. I actually go out and get documents to back up what I am saying..
J WB
|
|
|
Post by wolfbela on May 1, 2011 10:46:19 GMT -5
Someone tell Smitty33 on PB29 if he is so desperate to see the Hodges' email, ask Hodges for it..
Second, I only relayed what was told to me by Mr. Fryar. Originally, he said he would release it. Maybe after careful review and to protect his clients, us.. he obviously changed his mind..
Believe me, he doesn't need our CMKX money..
If Smitty is getting his shorts all knotted up, ante up the money, or go ask Hodges.. or get his own attorney..then Hodges can email him...
Also, as has been made clear several times, the Fryar office will not release a contract without the proper identification first. It will not be posted on the net. END OF STORY..
Supposedly, Tyler has provided Hodges with a complete list of the shareholders. I would worry more about that than worrying about Fryar.
These are not my policies.. I am a client like everyone else...So lets get the story straight, if that is possible on PB29....
Jerry WB
|
|
|
Post by goodolboy on May 1, 2011 12:37:21 GMT -5
Someone tell Smitty33 on PB29 if he is so desperate to see the Hodges' email, ask Hodges for it.. Second, I only relayed what was told to me by Mr. Fryar. Originally, he said he would release it. Maybe after careful review and to protect his clients, us.. he obviously changed his mind.. Believe me, he doesn't need our CMKX money.. If Smitty is getting his shorts all knotted up, ante up the money, or go ask Hodges.. or get his own attorney..then Hodges can email him... Also, as has been made clear several times, the Fryar office will not release a contract without the proper identification first. It will not be posted on the net. END OF STORY.. Supposedly, Tyler has provided Hodges with a complete list of the shareholders. I would worry more about that than worrying about Fryar.These are not my policies.. I am a client like everyone else...So lets get the story straight, if that is possible on PB29.... Jerry WB Hodges has not been provided anything of the sort by Tyler. If, however, Hodges received it from Kevin after his resignation, there will be no rock Kevin can hide under that I won't find him. And, that's a fact.
|
|
|
Post by goodolboy on May 1, 2011 12:39:48 GMT -5
GOB and Jimmy, If they are not lying, when are they going to straighten out their "status" with the TX SOS so they are a legitimate business in the eyes of TX.. Their response to the shareholders' response letters was beyond weak... I, for one, welcome Atty. Fryar's fresh objective legal view of this mess.. I see Tyler is still not compliant with the TX SOS as of today, 5.1.11 Please click to see the current status.. They have not responded. They have till 5/22/11, or they will not be a legal entity in the state of TX. www.zshare.net/download/896547238558e93d/I would think I would worry about that first, wouldn't you.... Jerry Jerry, until that date comes and goes I wouldn't be too worried about it.
|
|
|
Post by wolfbela on May 1, 2011 13:00:02 GMT -5
GOB,
It is my understanding Hodges has been provided with a copy of the list of shareholders.
Even if Tyler folds, it is not a great worry to me..
I know without a doubt that Eric Fryar will put an end to this madness in a few months time..
We all have what we believe.. for me personally, I believe in myself, what I have seen, and the rights of the shareholders to have and know the truth..I believe with this action it will be forthcoming very shortly..
Jerry WB
|
|
|
Post by wolfbela on May 1, 2011 13:08:46 GMT -5
I have done some research into the phrase "similarly situated". It is a very ambiguous term and one that is totally unclear in legal circles. From what I can determine, the only way it comes into play with the Hodges' situation is if Hodges would file a class action.. Meaning you could just have one plaintiff and include all those that are "similarly situated" in a class action and have everyone covered. Outside of a class action, the words "similarly situated" mean nothing as far as legal protection or being involved in this current Hodges action in anyway..other than for the 7 or 5 remaining plaintiffs. So. like the FL authorities said, we are not represented at all at this time.. until those seeking to become a client of Mr. Fryar do so.. JOIN US TODAY!!!!cculotta@fryarlawfirm.comJerry WB
|
|
|
Post by goodolboy on May 1, 2011 15:37:51 GMT -5
GOB, It is my understanding Hodges has been provided with a copy of the list of shareholders. Even if Tyler folds, it is not a great worry to me.. I know without a doubt that Eric Fryar will put an end to this madness in a few months time.. We all have what we believe.. for me personally, I believe in myself, what I have seen, and the rights of the shareholders to have and know the truth..I believe with this action it will be forthcoming very shortly.. Jerry WB Jerry, if CMKM folds, you will have nothing. That's a fact. If that is your goal, then come out and just say it.
|
|
|
Post by wolfbela on May 1, 2011 16:32:51 GMT -5
GOB,
I thought this was going to be civilized..Where did I say I wanted Tyler to fold. Tyler is immaterial to me. The only way Tyler is material to me is if they are found to be compliant in actions harmful to the shareholders.
Please...get the facts straight.. I merely said that because they have not become compliant with the TX SOS..and then if they don't they will be delisted as a company..that is not me.. that is the state of TX.. so please, get it straight..
Would people please get their facts straight before they make posts that are inaccurate...
C'mon...
Jerry WB
|
|
|
Post by wolfbela on May 1, 2011 16:40:22 GMT -5
to the PB 29 crew... Ed Jagacki .. who has a smart ### answer for everybody, but not fact one.. and Single.. Here is the truth.. I asked for transparency with Mr. Fryar. He is the one that established the ground rules for protecting his clients.. The difference with Hodges is he spouted his information, if you can call it that, all over the net for all to see. Mr. Fryar's action will be protected by a password secured website..for the paying clients.. as opposed to non-paying plaintiffs.. I ask all those that are not happy with the transparency issue, which is out of my hands and not the way I wanted it, to rejoice in the great transparency and honesty you are getting with Atty. Hodges.. and stop complaining about Fryar, unless you are spending your money with us..Give it a rest already.. it is going forward, so deal with it..Be thankful 100+ shareholders are willing to spend their money to find out the truth.. But I guess you are happier just cutting down the effort on an internet board... Basically, what the complainers want is for us to spend our money so they can sit back, get answers, and then complain some more about it... cculotta@fryarlawfirm.comJerry WB
|
|
marty
Millionaire
Posts: 4
|
Post by marty on May 1, 2011 17:15:08 GMT -5
Jerry: Has Mr. Fryar addressed the issue of 'similarily situated'? If so, what are his thoughts regarding shareholders' rights to any trust, if there is one, with this wording. Thanks.
Marty
|
|
|
Post by goodolboy on May 1, 2011 18:28:07 GMT -5
GOB, I thought this was going to be civilized..Where did I say I wanted Tyler to fold. Tyler is immaterial to me. The only way Tyler is material to me is if they are found to be compliant in actions harmful to the shareholders. Please...get the facts straight.. I merely said that because they have not become compliant with the TX SOS..and then if they don't they will be delisted as a company..that is not me.. that is the state of TX.. so please, get it straight.. Would people please get their facts straight before they make posts that are inaccurate... C'mon... Jerry WB Jerry, I thought this was a civilized conversation. Your point was understood, but I was pointing out that your lack of concern for the future of CMKM was, to say the least, alarming considering that it happens to be the company we are all shareholders of. Again, filing with the state of TX isn't much of a concern considering they've been late on that particular filing in the past, and have always managed to get it done. That is why I say it's of little concern. You see Jerry, everything has a price and a priority. Does Tyler spend what money it has on taking Roger Glenn's deposition, or does it worry about a corporate filing that it can rectify in the future? Only someone who doesn't want to see the company move forward with it's litigation, and fail to recover from those that caused this pump and dump would even consider putting the corporate filiing fees ahead of the discovery process. Understand that this suit alone has the potential to make this company solvent, exercise the agreement that we have with Koch, verify the core sample that sits in Canada, and get us trading again. So, it's a matter of priorities Jerry. And, not to be nit picky, by I think you meant to say complicit in the actions that hurt shareholders, not compliant. And, where that is concerned, there is ample evidence to support Tyler's ongoing efforts to recover assets for the future benefit of the shareholders. Sure, it's a Hail Mary pass, but it is the only legitimate game in town other than the SEC ( and they haven't even bothered securing assets from their judgements.)
|
|
|
Post by wolfbela on May 1, 2011 18:48:58 GMT -5
There are no filing fees.. They have to simply respond
From what I understand, Frizzell is negligent in this matter as well for his own office, except no one reported him..
The only reason I found out about CMKX is I sent my demand letters and they were returned and not picked up...
Heck of a way to run a company, wouldn't you say GOB..
Part of having concern for a company and its management is that the company and management have a similar concern for the shareholders, which in my opinion they have not..
I am only concerned right now in assets that may be out there for the shareholders. That's it..
Sorry, don't buy it..
Something stinks in Tyler...
J WB
|
|
|
Post by wolfbela on May 1, 2011 18:51:56 GMT -5
Mr. Fryar has stated to me that the he believe the Hodges action doesn't have much merit. He also wants to see if we are damaged by it..
If this had been a class action by Hodges and we lost, we would be done...PERIOD..
J WB
|
|
|
Post by goodolboy on May 1, 2011 18:58:09 GMT -5
Not true Jerry. filing fees are required with every single change recorded with the state. And, it isn't Frizzell's personal responsibility to file anything with the state pertaining to the corporation. That was Kevin West's job, and now is Jim Lowdin's. So, you would be wrong again. Frizzell is in no way negligent in this matter, as he only serves as the corporate attorney handling only the litigation currently filed. As for your demand letter, it was answered by the company... not Frizzell. Again, it wasn't his responsibility to pick up the mail, nor respond to your demand. There are no filing fees.. They have to simply response.. From what I understand, Frizzell is negligent in this matter as well for his own office, except no one reported him.. The only reason I found out about CMKX is I sent my demand letters and they were returned and not picked up... Heck of a way to run a company, wouldn't you say GOB.. Sorry, don't buy it.. Something stinks in Tyler... J WB
|
|
|
Post by goodolboy on May 1, 2011 18:59:33 GMT -5
Mr. Fryar has stated to me that the he believe the Hodges action doesn't have much merit. He also wants to see if we are damaged by it.. If this had been a class action by Hodges and we lost, we would be done...PERIOD.. J WB Quite possible, as a few of us have previously looked into that Jerry. His actions could have seriously damaged us and the company.
|
|
|
Post by wolfbela on May 1, 2011 20:51:27 GMT -5
GOB,
In regards to Frizzell, I wasn't talking about him in regards to the company being legitimately filed, I was talking about his own office.. Seems one of the shareholders found he isn't in compliance either..
From what the TX SOS attorney told me, the company just has to register the office and the agent (CEO)... she never said anything about fees, but I didn't ask..I didn't think a couple of hundred bucks would really matter..
J WB
|
|
jimmyd
Bonafied Millionaire
Posts: 25
|
Post by jimmyd on May 1, 2011 21:13:28 GMT -5
So what is the end game? Fryar finds out that Hodges is full of BS, or crazy and then what? Are we going to sue Hodges? Will that be another $250 or more?
Or, are you going to turn around and go after Tyler? If you are, then you've lost me there as to your reasoning.
|
|
|
Post by wolfbela on May 2, 2011 6:19:49 GMT -5
We are seeking information on assets, trusts, accounts, property, etc.. That is it..
I don't know how I can be more clear than that..
BTW, I believe the CEO's name is Lowden. I also believed that he owned a small package delivery company.. so he isn't qualified to run the company... neither is a shareholder, unless it is one with management experience in whatever business the company is actually trying to do..so the merry-go-round continues..
I am through trying to explain our action...
J WB
|
|
jimmyd
Bonafied Millionaire
Posts: 25
|
Post by jimmyd on May 2, 2011 6:47:26 GMT -5
It sounds like you could be a lot more clearer than that. Especially if you want my $250. You cannot expect people to go on a wild goose chase without clearly defining the objective.
My question stands. What does my $250 get me?
|
|
|
Post by goodolboy on May 2, 2011 7:04:52 GMT -5
GOB, In regards to Frizzell, I wasn't talking about him in regards to the company being legitimately filed, I was talking about his own office.. Seems one of the shareholders found he isn't in compliance either.. From what the TX SOS attorney told me, the company just has to register the office and the agent (CEO)... she never said anything about fees, but I didn't ask..I didn't think a couple of hundred bucks would really matter.. J WB Jerry, are you referring to a simple business license? If so, that does come with a flat assessment fee and a percentage of one's gross income. Again, I don't see this as an issue given that EVERY small business that I've ever known usually waits until the last day to make those payments. It's called cash flow management.
|
|
|
Post by goodolboy on May 2, 2011 7:24:38 GMT -5
We are seeking information on assets, trusts, accounts, property, etc.. That is it.. I don't know how I can be more clear than that.. BTW, I believe the CEO's name is Lowden. I also believed that he owned a small package delivery company.. so he isn't qualified to run the company... neither is a shareholder, unless it is one with management experience in whatever business the company is actually trying to do..so the merry-go-round continues.. I am through trying to explain our action... J WB So, it's geared mainly toward Hodges efforts then given that Tyler's actions are still in active litigation. I'm not sure why you don't think Lowden is qualified to run CMKM in it's current state of operation given his business ownerships and previous experience. As the company moves forward, I can understand the need for someone with experience in the field CMKM chooses to pursue, but they (the BOD) have always stated exactly that as well. Jerry, this is sounding more like you just plain dislike Tyler and everything it has been doing to recover what was stolen from us. I mean, I understand being frustrated about the lack of details, but the fact that they are still moving forward with the lawsuits, amending them when new information becomes available, should give you some hope. But, you don't seem supportive of any of that. I just don't get it Jerry, and I say that with all due respect. You and I bought shares of CMKM Diamonds Inc. We were sold a bill of goods based on the stories developed in a pump and dump scheme. Some are still sold on the concept of some fantasy trust and imminent payout, and continued to buy from the likes of Deli. The lies told to us by these insiders have divided the shareholder base, and biased many to believe they are "Pro CMKX" yet they actually are anti CMKM Diamonds... the very company that they bought shares in, and the same company currently involved in legitimate litigations to recover assets from those that perpetuated the scam to begin with. As I've said, I'm all for you guys trying to discover answers for yourselves, but when you approach it from a position of bias, you are not doing yourself any justice at all. And, from what I've seen and read, you still are approaching this from the belief that some trust exists. I could be wrong, but it sure has the undertones of exactly that.
|
|
|
Post by wolfbela on May 2, 2011 8:01:14 GMT -5
GOB,
I am approaching this from the point of no one being upfront with us. Even Mr. Fryar, when I talked to him about Tyler's inaction in the Hodges' matter, was dumbfounded at their inaction and casual approach to the shareholders' request...
As I understand the TX law, they at least have to have a verifiable address to deliver to and a registered agent...
Seems to me if you can't take care of this little business about being legitimate, what is the point of trying to be in business at all...unless...
J WB
Here are some emails to me from Attorney Nahdiah Hoang of the TX SOS.. Perhaps they can better shed some light on your concept of what I am talking about
On Feb 11, 2011, at 10:19 AM, Nahdiah Hoang wrote:
Please disregard my earlier email. I just read all of your emails, and we will proceed with the 90-day notice procedure to inquire into whether this entity is maintaining a registered agent. If they are not, we will administratively terminate their existence.
On Mar 31, 2011, at 9:37 AM, Nahdiah Hoang wrote:
According to our records, we sent the letter on 2-22-2011. On 3-7-2011, we received the "green card" showing that the letter was not accepted. We have to wait 90 days before we can terminate the entity.
They have 90 days from the date of our letter (2-22-2011) to address the issue.
Nahdiah Hoang Attorney, Business & Public Filings Division Office of the Secretary of State (512) 463-5586 corphelp@sos.state.tx.us
|
|
|
Post by wolfbela on May 2, 2011 8:04:49 GMT -5
Jimmy,
If you can't understand what I explained to you, perhaps you should just keep your money..
Jerry
|
|
|
Post by goodolboy on May 2, 2011 8:19:49 GMT -5
GOB, I am approaching this from the point of no one being upfront with us. Even Mr. Fryar, when I talked to him about Tyler's inaction in the Hodges' matter, was dumbfounded at their inaction and casual approach to the shareholders' request... As I understand the TX law, they at least have to have a verifiable address to deliver to and a registered agent... Seems to me if you can't take care of this little business about being legitimate, what is the point of trying to be in business at all...unless... J WB Here are some emails to me from Attorney Nahdiah Hoang of the TX SOS.. Perhaps they can better shed some light on your concept of what I am talking about On Feb 11, 2011, at 10:19 AM, Nahdiah Hoang wrote:
Please disregard my earlier email. I just read all of your emails, and we will proceed with the 90-day notice procedure to inquire into whether this entity is maintaining a registered agent. If they are not, we will administratively terminate their existence. On Mar 31, 2011, at 9:37 AM, Nahdiah Hoang wrote:
According to our records, we sent the letter on 2-22-2011. On 3-7-2011, we received the "green card" showing that the letter was not accepted. We have to wait 90 days before we can terminate the entity. They have 90 days from the date of our letter (2-22-2011) to address the issue.
Nahdiah Hoang Attorney, Business & Public Filings Division Office of the Secretary of State (512) 463-5586 corphelp@sos.state.tx.usJerry, Kevin immediately went to Hodges office to question him about evidence when he filed his Bivens suit. Hodges refused to provide anything. CMKM was and is involved in quite a few legal actions, recovered a great deal of detailed information, yet nothing to support Hodges claims. It was pretty well laid out in their reply to your demand letter. I'm thinking you are relying on omega's information/perspective which I have warned you about as well as Mike. He has one specific goal in mind, and it is not to your benefit, nor mine.
|
|
|
Post by wolfbela on May 2, 2011 9:56:40 GMT -5
GOB,
I am not relying on that information..at all. I have other information coming to me that perhaps all is not what we think in TX..
What about the TX SOS emails.. does that explain to you what I am talking about..
Really to me, it is a mute point.. This company will never go anywhere like this.. It is still functioning for a reason I hope we can discover soon...
GOB .. you made my point.. precisely.. If Hodges would not give West the evidence, Tyler immediately should have gone to court to subpoena Hodges, whether on a friendly or family basis or not..and make him produce whatever he has or is knowledgeable about. That is what a real company and real officers do.. Fryar wondered why this wasn't done..Since the Co. wouldn't do that, now shareholders have to take this legal initiative with Fryar to do the same thing.. Don't you find that odd.. I do..
There is nothing to be gained by us going back and forth. My only real concern in this stock right now is engaging Atty. Fryar so we can have an honest, objective look at this mess. None of this other stuff matters...
I am always amazed when a person or group, whether on the Tyler or Hodges side of the street, don't want a third party involved to get another view at what is going on here..
J WB
|
|
|
Post by goodolboy on May 2, 2011 10:31:52 GMT -5
GOB, I am not relying on that information..at all. I have other information coming to me that perhaps all is not what we think in TX.. What about the TX SOS emails.. does that explain to you what I am talking about.. Really to me, it is a mute point.. This company will never go anywhere like this.. It is still functioning for a reason I hope we can discover soon... GOB .. you made my point.. precisely.. If Hodges would not give West the evidence, Tyler immediately should have gone to court to subpoena Hodges, whether on a friendly or family basis or not..and make him produce whatever he has or is knowledgeable about. That is what a real company and real officers do.. Fryar wondered why this wasn't done..Since the Co. wouldn't do that, now shareholders have to take this legal initiative with Fryar to do the same thing.. Don't you find that odd.. I do.. There is nothing to be gained by us going back and forth. My only real concern in this stock right now is engaging Atty. Fryar so we can have an honest, objective look at this mess. None of this other stuff matters... I am always amazed when a person or group, whether on the Tyler or Hodges side of the street, don't want a third party involved to get another view at what is going on here.. J WB I'll start with the last comment you made and work my way up. 1) I support you and the others in hiring an attorney to get answers. And, I hope it provides you and the rest with a peace of mind... all shareholders deserve this much. 2) There is a great deal to be learned in our back and forth discussion here if you choose objectivity over tunnel vision (I've been there and know this for a fact.) 3) I made no such point. You only choose to believe that as it supports your position. I clearly pointed out that in the years of research that Tyler has put into this, not a single shred of evidence has ever been obtained to support Hodges' claim. Hodges, doesn't have any either. That said, why would any company expend it's limited resources on a wild goose chase when legitimate assets/targets are evidenced? You are about to spend $35k on whether or not a trust exists. Tyler isn't about to spend that on something unsubstantiated when it has legitimate, verified assets it's pursuing. 4) It is a moot point at this juncture only in that the no business model currently exists for the CMKM shell... thus no experienced CEO required. 5) The TX SOS emails relate to what I was talking about in relation to CMKM, the company. It will be taken care of as it always has been. As I said, this is not the first time they've been late on the corporate filings. This has nothing to do with Frizzell unless he chooses to become the registered agent. 6) When you have documented, verifiable evidence of anything actionable against CMKM or it's attorney, please let me know. So far, you only have misrepresentations, apprehensions, and the warped guidance of omegapoint who has a clear and focused agenda. And again, that agenda is not in your nor my best interest. And, that is a fact.
|
|
|
Post by wolfbela on May 2, 2011 12:08:43 GMT -5
GOB,
You are not getting it.. Frizzell, on his own.. his own attorney office.. is delinquent in filings too.. not just CMKX..
I do not base my opinions or standing on Omega,,light.. or whomever..
These is possible activity going on that we will be checking on, hopefully. and that is that..
I am open to listening to all sides of the story, but fortunately, in life, I know when I am being fed a crock of BS... and that's what we are being fed..
I think just filing lawsuit after lawsuit chasing people who can never come up with the money you are seeking is ridiculous.. But better to do that than subpoena Hodges and either have him produce the evidence or force an end to the madness.. Tyler wants to do neither..
On this, no matter how much discussion. we will not agree...
Thus the need for Eric Fryar.. I do find it interesting that Tyler has had no comment about Fryar, especially considering his stature in the legal profession..
We are looking at all assets, meaning trusts and some other accounts that are unknown to the shareholders at this time that certain people have access to.
Jerry
|
|
|
Post by goodolboy on May 2, 2011 12:30:08 GMT -5
GOB, You are not getting it.. Frizzell, on his own.. his own attorney office.. is delinquent in filings too.. not just CMKX.. I do not base my opinions or standing on Omega,,light.. or whomever.. These is possible activity going on that we will be checking on, hopefully. and that is that.. I am open to listening to all sides of the story, but fortunately, in life, I know when I am being fed a crock of BS... and that's what we are being fed.. I think just filing lawsuit after lawsuit chasing people who can never come up with the money you are seeking is ridiculous.. But better to do that than subpoena Hodges and either have him produce the evidence or force an end to the madness.. Tyler wants to do neither.. On this, no matter how much discussion. we will not agree... Thus the need for Eric Fryar.. I do find it interesting that Tyler has had no comment about Fryar, especially considering his stature in the legal profession.. We are looking at all assets, meaning trusts and some other accounts that are unknown to the shareholders at this time that certain people have access to. Jerry Jerry, Frizzell is not required to file corporate if he chooses to be a sole proprietor or D/B/A. He only has to do that if he wishes to cover his company via LLC, C corp or sub S status. Again, how he runs his law practice is of no concern at this point. As for Tyler commenting on Fryar's involvement, I would guess they welcome it to be honest with you. Now, you assume their lawsuits are ridiculous simply because you've not followed that side in detail. I say this only because it is painfully clear by your postings that you do not understand the filings, status, and $$$ on the line. I'd be happy to help you with that if you would like, but it appears, you are not interested in the the facts surrounding those efforts. And yes, you have been fed a great deal of BS, and unfortunately it still leads you somewhat astray. I am confident that Fryar will rectify that for you.
|
|
|
Post by goodolboy on May 2, 2011 12:40:33 GMT -5
Jerry, if you want answers start here:
OIG Report 528 CMKM Diamonds, Inc US Securities and Exchange Commission FOIA Office 6432 General Green WayAlexandria, Va. 22312-2413
To whom it may concern,
Under the Freedom of Information Act, I am requesting a copy of an investigation recently concluded by the Office of Inspector General. The report I am seeking is CMKM Diamonds. I would prefer to receive copy in electronic format if permissible e-Mailed to: __(your contact info here)____________ I would be willing to pay necessary fees for this report up to $100.00 if required. I believe that since this report has been made partially public by the recent OIG semi-annual report, and the final findings will be made public in the next semi-annual report, I contest that the fee should be waived.
Thank You
You're going to have to sue for it, but you will have all answers you seek.
Good luck my friend.
|
|
|
Post by wolfbela on May 2, 2011 12:43:46 GMT -5
GOB,
I have long ago realized when I come up against a person I cannot sway, I let them go.
I wish you good luck with Tyler.. They have served you well so far.
I will let it to Mr. Fryar to clear the air, once and for all.
This discussion is over, as far as I am concerned, and I will not reply to further posts about this.
Jerry WB
|
|