I have received a letter from OSC requesting us to stop trading. We have not traded for over a month now. I will know more in the morning as all offices here are closed today.
Steve has asked me to stay on as a consultant at this time. He wants me to ensure all deals are completed in the Middle East as well as some here. I agreed.
I could only speculate on what role they had but we have had enough speculation at this time. If I find that anybody has had a role good or bad in effecting the price of this share I will report it to the shareholders.
When can we expect the audited financials? What is the "slight delay". Please let us know. This is so important. Many shareholders have lost thousands of $$$$ because of the broken promises.
cement deal looks good. Sellers bank has received draft LC and will reply within the next day or so. As soon as it is completed..I will let you know. This is a very complicated procedure as I am sure you are all aware. Sometimes it takes a little longer then I would like. Both sides are committed to completing this deal and Sam Sulja remains in the region working with both parties.
What is management currently doing to get the company out of this mess? Are you and Steve confident that these problems will be solved in the near future or are you uncertain?
I am confused as to why the osc Why would the osc contact you, wouldn't they contact steve sulja?
When will info be released about the recent deal pr'd. In order to return investor confidence, don't you think that following through on pr's now is essential. The stock is declining in price and all we are hearing and not directly from a pr, is the lawyers are saying no pr's right now. Why won't Steve inform shareholders about why? Instead, we shareholders are left with an enormous amount of stress and anxiety and complete silence from the company. Who is in charge of communicating with shareholders?
Petar this is rule 144 (basically summed up in the first sentence directly below) Is/was there any restricted stock sales????:
Untangling Rule 144: Restricted Stock Sales and Affiliate Volume Limitations
At the foundation of our securities laws is the premise that shares of stock that are not registered with the SEC are subject to limitations on resale. Naturally, however, exceptions to this premise evolved. Perhaps the most well-known exemption to the limitation on resale rule is Rule 144. Rule 144, promulgated under the Securities Act of 1933, is a safe harbor provision that allows holders of restricted securities to make sales of stock when certain conditions are met. The most familiar condition imposed by Rule 144 is a one-year holding period before any resales may be made--but that is certainly not the only condition.
Rule 144's mandatory conditions are the following, and all of the conditions must be met for Rule 144's safe harbor to apply to a transaction, and we'll cover each of the requirements in detail below: • A potential seller must satisfy the minimum one-year holding period. • The seller must file a Form 144 with the SEC (unless the transaction is very small, under $10,000 worth of shares). • There must be "current public information" available on the issuer. • The sales must be in arm's-length broker transactions, without pre-arrangement or broker's solicitation of orders. • The seller must have a bona fide intention to sell the shares at the time he/she files the Form 144.
The "Current Public Information" Requirement
Paragraph 144(c) dictates that current public information regarding an issuer must be available regarding an issuer before a 144 sale takes place. This requirement protects potential purchasers in 144 transactions; ideally, purchasers can thereby research companies before buying shares. The current public information requirement is met automatically if the issuer is fully reporting and is current in its filings (OTCBB companies, and those on the larger exchanges). With respect to pink sheet companies, the issuer must have information publicly available equivalent to that information found in a 15c2-11 filing. Many pink sheet issuers satisfy this requirement by subscribing to the pink sheet news service or by posting corporate information and financials on their website. Whether the scope of the information that an issuer provides meets the current public information requirement is a factual question that should be addressed to an attorney.
Rule 144's Holding Period(s)
At its core, Rule 144 allows a holder of restricted stock to resell such stock upon the expiration of a one-year holding period. Until February of 1997, the holding period was two years. The foundational principle underlying 144's holding period is that securities acquired and held for one year were most likely purchased with investment intent and not with a "view towards distribution." The holding period begins upon the "date of acquisition of the securities." Securities are deemed acquired when the full purchase price or other consideration is paid. Securities issued, but not fully paid, do not start the 144 holding period until full payment is made.
The expiration of a two-year holding period triggers a considerable relaxing of 144's strictness, but only for non-affiliates. After a two-year holding period, Rule 144(k) eliminates the current public information requirement, eliminates all volume restrictions, eliminates the "manner of sale" restrictions that apply to the way brokers must handle 144 sales, and eliminates the required filing of Form 144. Thus, Rule 144(k) removes all significant restrictions to resale for non-affiliates who hold shares for two years. Section (k) of Rule 144 is the section upon which holders rely when they have the restrictive legends removed from their stock certificates. Affiliates, however, remain bound by the major restrictions in Rule 144 until they cease to be affiliates.
Rule 144's Volume Restrictions, and the Importance of Affiliate Status
Rule 144 treats affiliates of the issuer much more strictly than it treats non-affiliates. The Rule applies to the sale of restricted (unregistered) stock by a non-affiliate. However, the Rule is far more imposing on affiliates; the Rule governs any sale of stock (both restricted and registered shares) by an affiliate of the issuer, and the Rule applies to affiliates indefinitely. Loosely defined, affiliates are control persons and other insiders, but we'll take a closer look at the definition of affiliates below.
With respect to sales of stock by an affiliate, Rule 144 imposes significant sales volume restrictions upon non-affiliates selling restricted stock, and upon affiliates selling either restricted or registered stock. Rule 144's volume restrictions are commonly referred to as "dribble out" provisions. We can distill the volume limitations as follows:
• Non-affiliates are subject to volume restrictions after holding stock for one year, but are no longer subject to volume restrictions after holding stock for two years. • Affiliates are subject to volume restrictions as long as they are affiliates.
The dribble out provisions limit the amount of stock that can be sold in any 90-day period. The volume restriction dictates that sales in a 90-day period cannot be more than the greater of the following: • 1% of the issuer's total outstanding shares, or, • The average reported weekly volume in an issuer's stock for the four weeks immediately preceding the filing of Form 144 (if the issuer trades on a stock exchange or Nasdaq--OTC and pink sheet companies can only be sold using 1% rule).
As an example, assume ABC Corp., listed on Nasdaq, has 10,000,000 shares outstanding and traded 25,000 shares in each of the 4 weeks prior to the filing of a potential seller's Form 144. The dribble out provisions allow a seller to sell the greater of 1% of the total shares outstanding (in this case, 100,000 shares), or the average weekly volume for the prior four weeks (in this case, 25,000 shares). Thus, the seller can sell the greater number, up to 100,000 shares in the 90-day period.
Who Is an Affiliate?
Because Rule 144 applies differently to affiliates and non-affiliates, it is important to know who is an affiliate. The Rule dictates that affiliate status attaches to any person who directly or indirectly controls, is controlled by, or is under common control with the issuer. Rule 405 defines "control" as the "power to direct . . . the management and policies" of an issuer, whether by ownership or position. Thus, directors, officers, and upper-level managers are clearly affiliates. Owners of 5% or more are typically considered affiliates, but be careful--while the 5% figure is widely relied upon, you won't find the 5% figure in any rule are case on the subject.
Manner of Sale Restrictions
Finally, the Rule dictates the manner in which shares can be sold under its protections. The sales must be handled in all respects as routine trading transactions, and brokers may not receive more than a normal commission. Neither the seller nor the broker can solicit orders to buy the securities.
A private sale of restricted shares is neither governed nor protected by Rule 144. That is not to say that private sales of restricted shares are illegal. By its own terms, Rule 144 is not exclusive, and sellers of restricted stock have a few other potential safe harbors to protect their resales. Private sellers of restricted shares commonly rely upon what is known the "4(1½)" exemption.
Why Are Opinion Letters Necessary?
A Rule 144 seller must also secure an opinion letter from the attorney for the issuer. This is because before a sale can take place, the transfer agent for the issuer must agree to remove the restrictions (and hence the restrictive legend) from the share certificate. The transfer agent will only agree to remove a restrictive legend if it receives a letter from the issuer's counsel carefully presenting the legal argument why the shares are available for sale under Rule 144.
If you want a serious answer....simply post a question not a statement. I never pumped this stock for reasons that you believe. We simply were trying to inform our shareholders. I never owned any stock in sljb and would not have profited from such actions.
Thanks for taking the time to speak with shareholders and address serious issues. I know it is very important to most of us and to me inparticular. I, personally have lost over 10K in my investment but have not sold a share. I still have faith. Some might call me crazy. I hope SLJB proves all the naysayers wrong.
If you did not PUMP it for reasons that I believe then why did you PUMP it? The nite you said you were on the way to post the financials, what happened? At some point Wessal was no longer a going to be involved with Sulja, what was the date you knew?
thanks concerned...our lawyers tell us we have not violated this section...not that they are saying we have violated at all...but I will ask again and post here. If we did commit any violations, I am sure we will be informed quickly. I hope not because we asked lawyers every step of the way. Contrary to the belief of many, I am in no way an expert on these matters, nor are the suljas..we hired people to help and perhaps we trusted too much. I am not sure at this time but will find out shortly I am sure.
Do you plan on offering proof of prior PR's and deals to Airy's (Rick and Paul) and StockHog when they visit? Have you set a date and time yet? If Steve cannot release info, could you?
If you did not PUMP it for reasons that I believe then why did you PUMP it? The nite you said you were on the way to post the financials, what happened? At some point Wessal was no longer a going to be involved with Sulja, what was the date you knew?
Peter, you are going to be inundated here with 100's of questions, could we comprise a list of questions that we could ask you and arrange for one person here to ask them so that we can get a clear conversation. Would you consider this? Thankyou.
Petar we had exchanged emails once or twice before, do you expect the audited financials to be completed by February and do you expect any executed deals to be announced before the AFs are released
1) I'd like to know how much Sulja needed to pay off debt?
2) Who WAS selling the company shares?
3) Where are those records kept?
4) Out of the $12mil or so, how much is funding the shares, if any, since it has been shown that none of the assetts were hard...only deals that never finalized, hence funded the vehicle??
The financials were simply not acceptable and were not representative of the truth as I knew it. If I published them then I would be a thief and lier. When they are correct they will be published. It is really that simple. I would be knowingly misrepresenting the truth if I aloud the afs to be published. I am truly sorry, however, they were incorrect.
Sophia, the list was is already made by StockHog and send to SLJB. We're still waiting for all the answers. Sulja told us that the lawayers would answer all those questions.
IWH...it was agreed to by myself and the suljas that the best way to complete this task is to perform a closing audit on the original corp which would act as an opening audited statement for sljb using the same firm to perform both. This way there can be no question.
Petar, Can you give any insight as to the timeframe the lawyers are expecting Steve to remain quiet or the reason as to why. The very nature of this scenario places fear among shareholders as if there is something gravely wrong and facts must be hidden to protect potential wrongdoers. Any light shed on this subject would be most appreciated!!
Lasernat: I thought that these matters could be dealt with in a quick and painless matter. I was once again mistaken. The only thing that matters is a truthful statement by the auditors. This in no way implies the auditors were being untruthful, rather that we at sljb needed to be more precise with our information. This was an internal issue and it is being corrected.
Aren't you tired of throwing BS around? How many run around stories are we supposed to believe?
Where are the long awaited Big 4 Audited Financials?
Where/who is Wessal and his money? Why are we supposed to get our information about them through possible rumors that they are no longer in the picture?
What happened to Emaar and our projects with them?
What happened to the tire recycling plant?
Why is it so hard to get any verifable information from the company?
What happened to the DIFX listing?
What happened to the design depot?
How much BS was put into the Pro Forma and unaudited financials? We still have those PDFs saved.
What happened to the share structure? It went from 500M OS with 362M held by insiders, 162M being restricted. To now, it's 609M OS with 640k restricted. That means over 200M shares were sold by the company during the "AF Pump" phase.
Why can't SLJB do anything they state in PRs? Small things like the lastest "we'll release more later this week" to "Petar is no longer part of the company" has all be bs.
Why are lawyers so involved when nothing illegal is supposibly involved? Sure seems like someone there is doing unlawful things and is trying to cover their a$$ now.
Oh, and why did you come on the blog on the 15th saying that everything will be up and it'll take a couple of hours but you had the AFs "in hand" and would release them? I mean, you MUST HAVE known that was BS and a flat out lie. There's no way things get that far and THEN you find out that it's inaccurate?
Merry Xmas and happy holidays, hopefully those that lost thousands of dollars while you were selling
Petar, Can you give any insight as to the timeframe the lawyers are expecting Steve to remain quiet or the reason as to why. The very nature of this scenario places fear among shareholders as if there is something gravely wrong and facts must be hidden to protect potential wrongdoers. Any light shed on this subject would be most appreciated!!
Wessal - it has been speculated that Wessal does not exist. From alot of dd, no one has produced a single verifiable source for them. If I am wrong please inform me right away. At this time, Wessal is no longer involved because they wanted too much control. I can understand that, but to ease investor anxiety, could you Peter, please provide some info that will verify Wessal's existence. Thankyou. If I am being direct, well, I am a shareholder.
Are there any solid dates or expected dates as to when the financials will be released? If the lawyers say you guys cannot release the information, did they say when it can be released? And if so, when? I know you say "soon" or "as soon as" or other similar words and phrases, but they have been used for months now and I was just wondering if there were any solid dates for anything at all.
Flippertilldeath said... 1) I'd like to know how much Sulja needed to pay off debt?
2) Who WAS selling the company shares?
3) Where are those records kept?
4) Out of the $12mil or so, how much is funding the shares, if any, since it has been shown that none of the assetts were hard...only deals that never finalized, hence funded the vehicle??
Concerned...Make no mistake. I do not agree with the lawyers on this matter. However, they are actually your lawyers and not mine and I have to believe they have your best interest in mind. that said, if I were a shareholder, I would certainly feel compelled to contact them and ask for their reason. That's just me though.
Petar, For what factual reason do you not agree with the lawyers? In other words, specifically why have they made a decision to do this? I presume since you do not agree with them that you know why they have gagged Steve. I will call and ask them, but can you tell us??
Petar it has been speculated that one of the problems with the original audit had to do with counting gross revenues from the brokered deals abroad rather than the commission only. If so it would make perfect sense that the numbers would have to be reworked. Does that make sense as to at least one factor that fouled things up?
Flippertilldeath said... 1) I'd like to know how much Sulja needed to pay off debt?
2) Who WAS selling the company shares?
3) Where are those records kept?
4) Out of the $12mil or so, how much is funding the shares, if any, since it has been shown that none of the assetts were hard...only deals that never finalized, hence funded the vehicle??
Sorry...I am trying to get to all the questions but I may miss a few. This is not intensional.
1) approx 7 million
2) company shares were traded by trusties appointed by sulja
3)those records are kept by kore, sulja and sulja lawyers.
4)there are many hard assets including real estate, equipment, inventory, ect. We thought about supporting shares but were convinced otherwise by those "smarter" then us.
Guys, please remember that there is no way Petar can answer every single question. This blog was just started a short while ago today and look at the volume! Also, it would be unreasonable to expect Petar to be here 24/7. He has a business to run. Lets use this to get information without it turning into a nut house. Please.
Petar, For what factual reason do you not agree with the lawyers? In other words, specifically why have they made a decision to do this? I presume since you do not agree with them that you know why they have gagged Steve. I will call and ask them, but can you tell us??
"A" go back to managing the IHUB board you won't let me on! I got answers so far to questions you won't/haven't asked. This is what "you" need. There will need to be accountability and the board is starting to get answers!
lasernat: Of course the work was done and your statement, although you may think them cute or witty, are not helping you, me or the other shareholders. To answer your question:
About one week after reviewing the figures. Posting total revenues on deals we are simply making a percentage is incorrect. I asked that those figures be removed from the website but was not aware that they were still somehow viewable.
Petar, thanks for taking my question . I have a loss of 60K so far . What good news can you give me to relay back to my family about your company? Also when will the next PR be released ?
These are very important questions Petar and your reluntance to answering them makes you look guilty as hell, please provide answers to them as we all paid for the answers. We deserve these answers.
Hello old friend! How's that black Maserati treating you? Andrew as you know isn't too happy with the mess you've created. A blog? Clever use of an I.R. tool. Still working the non-shareholder angle.
Are there any solid dates or expected dates as to when the financials will be released? If the lawyers say you guys cannot release the information, did they say when it can be released? And if so, when? I know you say "soon" or "as soon as" or other similar words and phrases, but they have been used for months now and I was just wondering if there were any solid dates for anything at all.
If andrew is so upset...perhaps he could return my calls and express his anger. and yes...it is true..I never had any shares. and what mess might he be referring to?
Petar, For what factual reason do you not agree with the lawyers? In other words, specifically why have they made a decision to do this? I presume since you do not agree with them that you know why they have gagged Steve. I will call and ask them, but can you tell us??
Petar, For what factual reason do you not agree with the lawyers? In other words, specifically why have they made a decision to do this? I presume since you do not agree with them that you know why they have gagged Steve. I will call and ask them, but can you tell us??
Maserati?....I have many vehicles and properties and have long before my involvement in sljb....I'm sure chad also was making money long before sljb...many people have these things.
PV, I appreciate you answerring my questions, honestly, I do. You are obviously getting hammered on some because of the events we are all aware of.
I need to clarify, for myself, if the share vehicle is funded and how?
Also, Sulja needed $7mil to pay off debt. The company has aprox 192mil shares, non-restricted, remaining. $5mil from the selling by trustees is located where, in SLJB's bank?
lasernat, this doesn't directly answer your question but petar commented on wessal:
pnv said... wessel may still have a role in sulja...these are details that are being worked out. We felt that sulja should be steering the ship...that's all
flippertilldeath: All debts that sulja had have since been retired. This was done through the sale of shares and profit. Also, the purchase of sam's was funded by the sale of shares. sljb, to my knowledge, is now debt free aside from a few vehicle leases which is really not a debt. All assets including inventory are free and clear.
First, thank you for cooperating with Airys and Hog, it makes a huge difference. On to my hard questions:
1) Why did SLJB unrestrict and/or sell massive amounts of shares when the price was around .10 per share? Did you/they know it would tank when the audit didn't come out? We need a reason to trust we weren't pump & dumped, as it appears to me.
I understand you didn't own shares personally, but it looks like the company/Steve Sulja made a bundle, and sold early knowing that the confirmed audit release data was not going to happen. THIS IS MY #1 PROBLEM, and I cannot throw support behind the company until I understand this better.
2) When the current assets are proven/audited, and some of the current deals are finished (let's say half), approximately what EPS do you expect SLJB will have? Based on expected information released within the next month.
I actually don't know of any insiders by ownership. And I'm not sure what they would be making a deal on. I really don't believe there to be a problem. But that is simply my opinion of course.
Thanks again for your time. There are certainly some pressing issues at hand. I wish we had the ability to eliminate these uncertanties that we are dealing with. I hope you will agree in saying that we will have these issues answered to the shareholders liking soon.
My family will not rest until we see the persons responsible for SLJB stock to go from 9 cents to .01 in handcuffs. Can't wait to visit Allinone behind bars . Merry Christmas !
Petar, I have been constantly asked by many posters if I know anything about how the proceeds of the capitalization was spent. Any way you could fill us in on that? Thanks!
Are there any solid dates or expected dates as to when the financials will be released? If the lawyers say you guys cannot release the information, did they say when it can be released? And if so, when? I know you say "soon" or "as soon as" or other similar words and phrases, but they have been used for months now and I was just wondering if there were any solid dates for anything at all.
sophia...I really don't want to sound insulting and that is not my goal here, however, wouldn't you think that I would use a real company if I were trying to pull something?...Of course wessel exists and they are a solid outfit. Their veiw and that of sulja simply differ.
Thank you, for that answer but after those debts were paid,can you approx what SLJB has left for future operations out of the $5mil remaining profit from sales of the shares?
I guess I am asking if the trustees got to keep any? or if not where did the $5mil minus SAM purchase go. It has been reported that SAM was purchased for 500K?
Airys418 said... Petar, I have been constantly asked by many posters if I know anything about how the proceeds of the capitalization was spent. Any way you could fill us in on that? Thanks! ________________________________
Hey how about that? I have been attempting to these answers already but your welcome to join in!
Thank you for providing this blog.Many have spent time and money bashing this stock and company management.Why now at such an crucial time silence.I will continue to support this company but just a simple answer would be appreciated.snips007
john....I am sorry but I am no longer in a position to make that call...and I truly think that if steve has learned anything from my mistakes, he will not dare give dates at this time....I am sure that once the first one is out, it will be easier to get the date right....at least within a month of the expected date. Everyone is being careful after I messed it up. I am sure you could understand that.
snips...I really don't know. I think the lawyers are trying to protect the company till all other prs are proven to be factual. This part I understand. They asked that steve not put out a pr simply saying happy holidays. They thought it "unwise". Like I said, this firm represent the corp and I'm sure whatever they are doing, it makes sense to them...Make no mistake, I am not in there good books at this time.
Sorry Petar , BUT you have not given us shareholders one positive response about upcoming deals and/or PRs. You need to come clean or your freedom might certainly be in jeapordy.
insider...I really don't have to be here...trust me...many on this side would rather I not be here...and besides th afs...what promises have been broken. The management of sljb is doing a great job but nobody want to recognize their efforts. They are expanding, working toward completing afs, and looking toward the future despite the ranting of numerous shareholders and drunken reporters. Why not try standing behind the company you have chosen to by shares in instead of looking for a fight at every turn? At this time I believe constructive comments are far more useful then destructive. What have you got yo gain by slamming the efforts of sljb management?
I understand that. You are not insulting me. But I and noone else can find any info on them. If someone said, why don't you invest in my company, you would want to know some facts about that company..that's a pretty standard policy. That would make you smart. This is not about you. This about SLJB being transparent. I would think you would want to provide us with that transparancy?
So I will ask again, please provide info on Wessal..who are they? This is not an unreasonable question by any means. If it is, then we have a problem here.
Correct me if I am wrong but so from our exchange so far, I get:
1) SLJB debt free 2) SAM under SLJB umbrella also debt free 3) cash on hand = $4.5mil 4) Only you have been told not to sell shares but the trustees can still sell the remaining shares at any time?
Have the lawyers been paid cash or are they receiving shares?
bob....thank you for your concern, however, I am not sure what it is you would like me to tell them. I still see nothing wrong. Now either I am a complete idiot or I still believe that what was done was correct. I am hoping I am not an idiot.
Petar that I can understand.Seems you were put in a position between a rock and a hard place and released information you had no real knowledge how to confirm.It is also clear that the original CPA firm screwd the audit real bad.We as shareholders have taken a big loss so far and do hope this mess can be explained to us so we can make educated decisins how long to hold this stock.I have always felt Sulja was a real and growing company and will remain a shareholder until proven other.Thanks for your response good luck with that Lettar you recieved.snips007
Petar, in case you missed my question, which is critical to me and many others:
1) Why did SLJB unrestrict and/or sell massive amounts of shares when the price was around .10 per share? Did you/they know it would tank when the audit didn't come out? We need a reason to trust we weren't pump & dumped, as it appears to me.
I understand you didn't own shares personally, but it looks like the company/Steve Sulja made a bundle, and sold early knowing that the confirmed audit release data was not going to happen. THIS IS MY #1 PROBLEM, and I cannot throw support behind the company until I understand this better.
Petar that is correct you really do not have to be here, however you have chosen to do so. In choosing to do so you had to realize that you were going to be asked many questions. Not only questions that you may like to answer but those you do not really want to answer. We as shareholders have paid and deserve to have those answers! We as shareholders deserve to know when Wessal was out of the picture? We as shareholders deserve to know when Sulja began selling shares into the market? We as shareholders deserve to know when you knew the AF's were bogus as compared to the unaudited financials? It is easy to say let us move on and be constructive now. Because it seems like you would like us to just bury our heads in the sand and not ask these questions.
1) Why did SLJB unrestrict and/or sell massive amounts of shares when the price was around .10 per share? Did you/they know it would tank when the audit didn't come out? We need a reason to trust we weren't pump & dumped, as it appears to me.
I understand you didn't own shares personally, but it looks like the company/Steve Sulja made a bundle, and sold early knowing that the confirmed audit release data was not going to happen. THIS IS MY #1 PROBLEM, and I cannot throw support behind the company until I understand this better.
trust me. I am trying to get to all the questions.
1)first off...we did not sell massive amounts of shares. Try to remember, we believed that we would be able to deliver th afs so why would we sell. Every day the people at sulja go to work including the sulja family. And yes, the company made money from the sale of shares...NOT STEVE...is that not the reason for going public? Sulja went public to expand and in order to expand....the company needed money. It's really that simple.
Flippertilldeath said... Correct me if I am wrong but so from our exchange so far, I get:
1) SLJB debt free 2) SAM under SLJB umbrella also debt free 3) cash on hand = $4.5mil 4) Only you have been told not to sell shares but the trustees can still sell the remaining shares at any time?
Have the lawyers been paid cash or are they receiving shares?
lasernat...I am not dodging any questions and would not be here if I didn't think I could offer some answers. I don't expect this to be a love in at this time...It's okay, I am somewhat thick skinned...but I also have to defend my corp and sljb when we are accused of things we simply did not do. I am sure you too understand.
PNV wrote: And yes, the company made money from the sale of shares...NOT STEVE...is that not the reason for going public? Sulja went public to expand and in order to expand....the company needed money. It's really that simple.
You raised all this money based on fake numbers and pr's that were incorrect.
Give the money back and start with the truth, then let's see how many shares SLJB could have sold and what pps highs would have been...
This is WillyWizard. I have profiled SLJB since it was LoftWerks. I have also doubled my position recently. Once this year end tax loss season is over sellers will think twice about selling.
I would like to communicate by phone. My email is willywizard@comcast.net my real name is Hal Engel.I have some info that you might find interesting.
My web site is http://www.willywizard.com You will see a SLJB button on the bottom of the entry page.
1) SLJB debt free 2) SAM under SLJB umbrella also debt free 3) cash on hand = $4.5mil 4) Only you have been told not to sell shares but the trustees can still sell the remaining shares at any time?
Have the lawyers been paid cash or are they receiving shares?
1)yes..aside from a few vehicle leases.
2)yes...sam is now sulja...no longer sams.
3)cash on hand I believe to be about .5 million...I must have missed that one or if I answered 4.5 million, I didn't understand the question.
4)trustees have no more shares to sell...all are being returned to TA.
insider....what are you saying? I am saying they are real prs and you saying they are not....let's just stop this nonsense and see where this is leading....I know what is true, you are simply speculating.
Petar you say you are trying to protect the company. In trying to do that you say that you parted ways with Wessel because they wanted more control. As a public company the shareholders are the responsibility of the CEO and its officers, correct? As a public company giving control to Wessel would have resulted in a profitable share price for the shareholders, correct? Then why would you not give Wessel the control outside of some type of ego thing? And yes we still want to know that date certain that Wessal was no longer involved with Sulja? Thank you.
1) SLJB debt free, aside from leased vehicles 2) SAM is now SLJB also debt free 3) cash on hand = $.5mil 4) Trustees have no shares to sell so float is 608mil 5) lawyers all paid for with cash
OK, now, shares are backed by the company so the shares have value based on the above, correct?
Where is this documented, in Nevada? Is there a site we can get this info?
(keep in mind this is the basics of the company for any shareholder)
without knowing the details of the deal with wessal, how can you make that statement? As CEO, I did what I felt was better for sljb. Perhaps you would have done differently. Who knows?
If I was at a shareholders meeting and asked- who is Wessal? And the company responded - We work with alot of companies, do you think we would not work with a real company? How do you think shareholders would react to that?
So - just so I am clear, you don't feel investors have the right to know who Wessal is?
I am not a basher. In fact, I have held through all this turmoil, I have even defended your company. And now, yes, I am rather insulted this is the response I am getting. But please, make it clear to everyone here that we do not have the right to know who the companies are that sljb pr's? That is just astonishing to me this is your answer?
I do not understand why you wont answer this question. Wessel was PR'd by SLJB and was going to have an important role with this company and according to your blog here, might still play a role. I am just asking you to provide info on them - it is a very reasonable question to ask.
'what are you saying? I am saying they are real prs and you saying they are not....let's just stop this nonsense'
real PRs? - revenue numbers that were withdrawn months later: FALSE - the statement NOT to touch the share structure: FALSE - the 350M cement deal: not closed: FALSE
who is telling nonsense here?
Your quote: 'Sulja went public to expand and in order to expand....the company needed money. It's really that simple."
FALSE again: Companys with a 25 yr track record dont need to go public and screw shareholders to get money.. They can get loans from banks and institutions.
439 comments:
1 – 200 of 439 Newer› Newest»Testing. OK
there we go...now I can talk
if you have any questions post them here. Invite others if you like, I will do my best answering.
I'll let others know about this. Thank you for your help.
Petar,
There has been some talk about SLJB being halted by the OSC for investors in Ontario. Know anything about this?
pnv = Petar V.?
I have received a letter from OSC requesting us to stop trading. We have not traded for over a month now. I will know more in the morning as all offices here are closed today.
Petar,
Us as in you and Steve? So you have no knowledge of the OSC trying to halt investing in the company to all of Ontario?
So the letter from the OSC was personal? Why would they ask you to stop trading?
Who has the OSC requested to stop trading?
The lawyers won't allow any release of info...
WHY?
What can/will they do if info IS released?
How does releasing info thru Airys or Hog circumvent retribution by the lawyers?
I am not clear on what they are asking. I received the request late afternoon on Friday. I will get answers tomorrow.
What about the lawyers that are blocking the release of some PR's: why is that?
Lawyers have asked Steve not to say anything...This has no effect on me.
I'm not sure why and they have not given a reason. Perhaps they want to get a handle on what is going on. I guess you can call them and ask.
What is your position w/ SLJB at this time?
So what van be expected in the PR's?
Can you tell us what role Partysasquatch, Chiphldr, and asus had in SLJB rise and fall?
Steve has asked me to stay on as a consultant at this time. He wants me to ensure all deals are completed in the Middle East as well as some here. I agreed.
How did that cement deal turn out that we were expecting a PR about a couple weeks ago?
I could only speculate on what role they had but we have had enough speculation at this time. If I find that anybody has had a role good or bad in effecting the price of this share I will report it to the shareholders.
Petar,
When can we expect the audited financials? What is the "slight delay". Please let us know. This is so important. Many shareholders have lost thousands of $$$$ because of the broken promises.
What can be expected now in the future?Audited financials? Any new deals? ...
Do you feel you or SS were set up in any manner by Kore or it's officers/partners?
Also...thank you for taking your holiday/family time to speak w/ us.
So what is your reasoning for stealing our money when you knew Wessal was not there yet you continued to sell into your own pump.
cement deal looks good. Sellers bank has received draft LC and will reply within the next day or so. As soon as it is completed..I will let you know. This is a very complicated procedure as I am sure you are all aware. Sometimes it takes a little longer then I would like. Both sides are committed to completing this deal and Sam Sulja remains in the region working with both parties.
What is management currently doing to get the company out of this mess? Are you and Steve confident that these problems will be solved in the near future or are you uncertain?
lasernet....lol
Petar,
Any update on a potential merger with an OTCBB company? This would seemingly solve all the current problems.
Any news or PR coming soon? It's been quite some time.
Why can't Steve override the attorneys and release news? What are the consequeses if he does this?
I am certain that this will be cleared up shortly.
Peter, hello.
I am confused as to why the osc Why would the osc contact you, wouldn't they contact steve sulja?
When will info be released about the recent deal pr'd. In order to return investor confidence, don't you think that following through on pr's now is essential. The stock is declining in price and all we are hearing and not directly from a pr, is the lawyers are saying no pr's right now. Why won't Steve inform shareholders about why? Instead, we shareholders are left with an enormous amount of stress and anxiety and complete silence from the company. Who is in charge of communicating with shareholders?
Petar,
Was there a rule 144 violation???
concerned: I am working on a plan with Steve on the OTCB matter. He will decide with the help of his lawyers. It was always our plan to do so.
Petar, do you know any of the "Trustees" personally?
I don't think it is funny at all. I want you to answer the hard question now. Those who have lost thousands of dollars deserve an answer from you.
Mr. Vuccicevich,
At this time, exactly what assets are represented by "SLJB"?
Thank you sir.
144? help me out
Any relationship between you and Chad Curtis at this time? Are you in speaking terms?
At this time, exactly what assets are represented by "SLJB"?.....In one week or so, a full appraisal of all assets will be completed.
I have not spoken to Chad for some time now. We have no working relationship nor does sljb
I have not spoken to Chad for some time now. We have no working relationship nor does sljb
Hello Petar - I hope you and yours had a joyous Christmas. This is Jan Baja (janniebgood) with whom you have spoken in the past.
Please Email me at janniebgood@tampabay.rr.com. I have a few questions I'd like to kick around with you. Thanks much.
Peter...Who is in charge of communicating with shareholders?
Thankyou
Petar this is rule 144 (basically summed up in the first sentence directly below) Is/was there any restricted stock sales????:
Untangling Rule 144: Restricted Stock Sales and Affiliate Volume Limitations
At the foundation of our securities laws is the premise that shares of stock that are not registered with the SEC are subject to limitations on resale. Naturally, however, exceptions to this premise evolved. Perhaps the most well-known exemption to the limitation on resale rule is Rule 144. Rule 144, promulgated under the Securities Act of 1933, is a safe harbor provision that allows holders of restricted securities to make sales of stock when certain conditions are met. The most familiar condition imposed by Rule 144 is a one-year holding period before any resales may be made--but that is certainly not the only condition.
Rule 144's mandatory conditions are the following, and all of the conditions must be met for Rule 144's safe harbor to apply to a transaction, and we'll cover each of the requirements in detail below:
• A potential seller must satisfy the minimum one-year holding period.
• The seller must file a Form 144 with the SEC (unless the transaction is very small, under $10,000 worth of shares).
• There must be "current public information" available on the issuer.
• The sales must be in arm's-length broker transactions, without pre-arrangement or broker's solicitation of orders.
• The seller must have a bona fide intention to sell the shares at the time he/she files the Form 144.
The "Current Public Information" Requirement
Paragraph 144(c) dictates that current public information regarding an issuer must be available regarding an issuer before a 144 sale takes place. This requirement protects potential purchasers in 144 transactions; ideally, purchasers can thereby research companies before buying shares. The current public information requirement is met automatically if the issuer is fully reporting and is current in its filings (OTCBB companies, and those on the larger exchanges). With respect to pink sheet companies, the issuer must have information publicly available equivalent to that information found in a 15c2-11 filing. Many pink sheet issuers satisfy this requirement by subscribing to the pink sheet news service or by posting corporate information and financials on their website. Whether the scope of the information that an issuer provides meets the current public information requirement is a factual question that should be addressed to an attorney.
Rule 144's Holding Period(s)
At its core, Rule 144 allows a holder of restricted stock to resell such stock upon the expiration of a one-year holding period. Until February of 1997, the holding period was two years. The foundational principle underlying 144's holding period is that securities acquired and held for one year were most likely purchased with investment intent and not with a "view towards distribution." The holding period begins upon the "date of acquisition of the securities." Securities are deemed acquired when the full purchase price or other consideration is paid. Securities issued, but not fully paid, do not start the 144 holding period until full payment is made.
The expiration of a two-year holding period triggers a considerable relaxing of 144's strictness, but only for non-affiliates. After a two-year holding period, Rule 144(k) eliminates the current public information requirement, eliminates all volume restrictions, eliminates the "manner of sale" restrictions that apply to the way brokers must handle 144 sales, and eliminates the required filing of Form 144. Thus, Rule 144(k) removes all significant restrictions to resale for non-affiliates who hold shares for two years. Section (k) of Rule 144 is the section upon which holders rely when they have the restrictive legends removed from their stock certificates. Affiliates, however, remain bound by the major restrictions in Rule 144 until they cease to be affiliates.
Rule 144's Volume Restrictions, and the Importance of Affiliate Status
Rule 144 treats affiliates of the issuer much more strictly than it treats non-affiliates. The Rule applies to the sale of restricted (unregistered) stock by a non-affiliate. However, the Rule is far more imposing on affiliates; the Rule governs any sale of stock (both restricted and registered shares) by an affiliate of the issuer, and the Rule applies to affiliates indefinitely. Loosely defined, affiliates are control persons and other insiders, but we'll take a closer look at the definition of affiliates below.
With respect to sales of stock by an affiliate, Rule 144 imposes significant sales volume restrictions upon non-affiliates selling restricted stock, and upon affiliates selling either restricted or registered stock. Rule 144's volume restrictions are commonly referred to as "dribble out" provisions. We can distill the volume limitations as follows:
• Non-affiliates are subject to volume restrictions after holding stock for one year, but are no longer subject to volume restrictions after holding stock for two years.
• Affiliates are subject to volume restrictions as long as they are affiliates.
The dribble out provisions limit the amount of stock that can be sold in any 90-day period. The volume restriction dictates that sales in a 90-day period cannot be more than the greater of the following:
• 1% of the issuer's total outstanding shares, or,
• The average reported weekly volume in an issuer's stock for the four weeks immediately preceding the filing of Form 144 (if the issuer trades on a stock exchange or Nasdaq--OTC and pink sheet companies can only be sold using 1% rule).
As an example, assume ABC Corp., listed on Nasdaq, has 10,000,000 shares outstanding and traded 25,000 shares in each of the 4 weeks prior to the filing of a potential seller's Form 144. The dribble out provisions allow a seller to sell the greater of 1% of the total shares outstanding (in this case, 100,000 shares), or the average weekly volume for the prior four weeks (in this case, 25,000 shares). Thus, the seller can sell the greater number, up to 100,000 shares in the 90-day period.
Who Is an Affiliate?
Because Rule 144 applies differently to affiliates and non-affiliates, it is important to know who is an affiliate. The Rule dictates that affiliate status attaches to any person who directly or indirectly controls, is controlled by, or is under common control with the issuer. Rule 405 defines "control" as the "power to direct . . . the management and policies" of an issuer, whether by ownership or position. Thus, directors, officers, and upper-level managers are clearly affiliates. Owners of 5% or more are typically considered affiliates, but be careful--while the 5% figure is widely relied upon, you won't find the 5% figure in any rule are case on the subject.
Manner of Sale Restrictions
Finally, the Rule dictates the manner in which shares can be sold under its protections. The sales must be handled in all respects as routine trading transactions, and brokers may not receive more than a normal commission. Neither the seller nor the broker can solicit orders to buy the securities.
A private sale of restricted shares is neither governed nor protected by Rule 144. That is not to say that private sales of restricted shares are illegal. By its own terms, Rule 144 is not exclusive, and sellers of restricted stock have a few other potential safe harbors to protect their resales. Private sellers of restricted shares commonly rely upon what is known the "4(1½)" exemption.
Why Are Opinion Letters Necessary?
A Rule 144 seller must also secure an opinion letter from the attorney for the issuer. This is because before a sale can take place, the transfer agent for the issuer must agree to remove the restrictions (and hence the restrictive legend) from the share certificate. The transfer agent will only agree to remove a restrictive legend if it receives a letter from the issuer's counsel carefully presenting the legal argument why the shares are available for sale under Rule 144.
If you want a serious answer....simply post a question not a statement. I never pumped this stock for reasons that you believe. We simply were trying to inform our shareholders. I never owned any stock in sljb and would not have profited from such actions.
Great job Petar lets hope sljb can get moving forward again
rick
So you your work for SLJB was a charitable contribution?
So who made money on the sale of the stock then?
Petar,
Thanks for taking the time to speak with shareholders and address serious issues. I know it is very important to most of us and to me inparticular. I, personally have lost over 10K in my investment but have not sold a share. I still have faith. Some might call me crazy. I hope SLJB proves all the naysayers wrong.
If you did not PUMP it for reasons that I believe then why did you PUMP it? The nite you said you were on the way to post the financials, what happened? At some point Wessal was no longer a going to be involved with Sulja, what was the date you knew?
PV, who is selling the company shares?
You say you did not own shares but did Consultech or Kore or any company you had an interest in?
PV-When Audited Financilas will be released
thanks concerned...our lawyers tell us we have not violated this section...not that they are saying we have violated at all...but I will ask again and post here. If we did commit any violations, I am sure we will be informed quickly. I hope not because we asked lawyers every step of the way. Contrary to the belief of many, I am in no way an expert on these matters, nor are the suljas..we hired people to help and perhaps we trusted too much. I am not sure at this time but will find out shortly I am sure.
Petar,
Do you plan on offering proof of prior PR's and deals to Airy's (Rick and Paul) and StockHog when they visit? Have you set a date and time yet? If Steve cannot release info, could you?
Nobody is selling the company shares at this time.
If you did not PUMP it for reasons that I believe then why did you PUMP it? The nite you said you were on the way to post the financials, what happened? At some point Wessal was no longer a going to be involved with Sulja, what was the date you knew?
You say you did not own shares but did Consultech or Kore or any company you had an interest in?
Peter, you are going to be inundated here with 100's of questions, could we comprise a list of questions that we could ask you and arrange for one person here to ask them so that we can get a clear conversation. Would you consider this?
Thankyou.
Petar we had exchanged emails once or twice before, do you expect the audited financials to be completed by February and do you expect any executed deals to be announced before the AFs are released
Rick lwh@psu.edu
1) I'd like to know how much Sulja needed to pay off debt?
2) Who WAS selling the company shares?
3) Where are those records kept?
4) Out of the $12mil or so, how much is funding the shares, if any, since it has been shown that none of the assetts were hard...only deals that never finalized, hence funded the vehicle??
The financials were simply not acceptable and were not representative of the truth as I knew it. If I published them then I would be a thief and lier. When they are correct they will be published. It is really that simple. I would be knowingly misrepresenting the truth if I aloud the afs to be published. I am truly sorry, however, they were incorrect.
Petar, when will the auditors be finished with the A/F's an about time frame. Thanks
And at what point did you know this?
Was it at the point when you said they can not be published until after Ramadan?
Sophia, the list was is already made by StockHog and send to SLJB. We're still waiting for all the answers. Sulja told us that the lawayers would answer all those questions.
Petar, any update on this?
IWH...it was agreed to by myself and the suljas that the best way to complete this task is to perform a closing audit on the original corp which would act as an opening audited statement for sljb using the same firm to perform both. This way there can be no question.
Petar,
Can you give any insight as to the timeframe the lawyers are expecting Steve to remain quiet or the reason as to why. The very nature of this scenario places fear among shareholders as if there is something gravely wrong and facts must be hidden to protect potential wrongdoers. Any light shed on this subject would be most appreciated!!
Petar at what point in time and space did you know that Wessal was no longer going to be involved in the SLJB picture?
Petar, can you tell us what asset or assets were transferred from Dubai/Middle East to Nevada?
Could you please state the names of the lawyers at each firm representing Sulja
Lasernat: I thought that these matters could be dealt with in a quick and painless matter. I was once again mistaken. The only thing that matters is a truthful statement by the auditors. This in no way implies the auditors were being untruthful, rather that we at sljb needed to be more precise with our information. This was an internal issue and it is being corrected.
Petar,
Aren't you tired of throwing BS around? How many run around stories are we supposed to believe?
Where are the long awaited Big 4 Audited Financials?
Where/who is Wessal and his money? Why are we supposed to get our information about them through possible rumors that they are no longer in the picture?
What happened to Emaar and our projects with them?
What happened to the tire recycling plant?
Why is it so hard to get any verifable information from the company?
What happened to the DIFX listing?
What happened to the design depot?
How much BS was put into the Pro Forma and unaudited financials? We still have those PDFs saved.
What happened to the share structure? It went from 500M OS with 362M held by insiders, 162M being restricted. To now, it's 609M OS with 640k restricted. That means over 200M shares were sold by the company during the "AF Pump" phase.
Why can't SLJB do anything they state in PRs? Small things like the lastest "we'll release more later this week" to "Petar is no longer part of the company" has all be bs.
Why are lawyers so involved when nothing illegal is supposibly involved? Sure seems like someone there is doing unlawful things and is trying to cover their a$$ now.
Oh, and why did you come on the blog on the 15th saying that everything will be up and it'll take a couple of hours but you had the AFs "in hand" and would release them? I mean, you MUST HAVE known that was BS and a flat out lie. There's no way things get that far and THEN you find out that it's inaccurate?
Merry Xmas and happy holidays, hopefully those that lost thousands of dollars while you were selling
Petar at what point in time did you realize the audit (if it existed) was not in line with the posted financials on the Sulja site?
The actual names of lawyers has to be provided by steve....sorry
Petar,
Can you give any insight as to the timeframe the lawyers are expecting Steve to remain quiet or the reason as to why. The very nature of this scenario places fear among shareholders as if there is something gravely wrong and facts must be hidden to protect potential wrongdoers. Any light shed on this subject would be most appreciated!!
Wessal - it has been speculated that Wessal does not exist. From alot of dd, no one has produced a single verifiable source for them. If I am wrong please inform me right away. At this time, Wessal is no longer involved because they wanted too much control. I can understand that, but to ease investor anxiety, could you Peter, please provide some info that will verify Wessal's existence.
Thankyou. If I am being direct, well, I am a shareholder.
Thank you.
Is a trading halt a possibilty?
SO once again no verifiable info in regards to the lawyers
Are there any solid dates or expected dates as to when the financials will be released? If the lawyers say you guys cannot release the information, did they say when it can be released? And if so, when?
I know you say "soon" or "as soon as" or other similar words and phrases, but they have been used for months now and I was just wondering if there were any solid dates for anything at all.
PV, did you skip my questions?
Flippertilldeath said...
1) I'd like to know how much Sulja needed to pay off debt?
2) Who WAS selling the company shares?
3) Where are those records kept?
4) Out of the $12mil or so, how much is funding the shares, if any, since it has been shown that none of the assetts were hard...only deals that never finalized, hence funded the vehicle??
December 26, 2006 12:11 PM
Concerned...Make no mistake. I do not agree with the lawyers on this matter. However, they are actually your lawyers and not mine and I have to believe they have your best interest in mind. that said, if I were a shareholder, I would certainly feel compelled to contact them and ask for their reason. That's just me though.
Petar at what point in time and space did you know that Wessal was no longer going to be involved in the SLJB picture?
Petar,
For what factual reason do you not agree with the lawyers? In other words, specifically why have they made a decision to do this? I presume since you do not agree with them that you know why they have gagged Steve. I will call and ask them, but can you tell us??
The law office in Chicago was contacted, but the caller was informed that the actual name of the lawyer was needed for any information.
Peter, why did you decide to do this blog?
Petar it has been speculated that one of the problems with the original audit had to do with counting gross revenues from the brokered deals abroad rather than the commission only. If so it would make perfect sense that the numbers would have to be reworked. Does that make sense as to at least one factor that fouled things up?
Petar at what point in time did you realize the audit (if it existed) was not in line with the posted financials on the Sulja site?
Flippertilldeath said...
1) I'd like to know how much Sulja needed to pay off debt?
2) Who WAS selling the company shares?
3) Where are those records kept?
4) Out of the $12mil or so, how much is funding the shares, if any, since it has been shown that none of the assetts were hard...only deals that never finalized, hence funded the vehicle??
Sorry...I am trying to get to all the questions but I may miss a few. This is not intensional.
1) approx 7 million
2) company shares were traded by trusties appointed by sulja
3)those records are kept by kore, sulja and sulja lawyers.
4)there are many hard assets including real estate, equipment, inventory, ect. We thought about supporting shares but were convinced otherwise by those "smarter" then us.
Petar, any idea of when the lawyers will start letting those PR's loose, the shareholders have been waiting a long time. Thanks.
sophia: I just thought you would like some answers.
how do i know you are who you say you are? so many lies have come from management, why should i believe you now?
You say you did not own shares but did Consultech or Kore or any company you had an interest in?
Guys, please remember that there is no way Petar can answer every single question. This blog was just started a short while ago today and look at the volume! Also, it would be unreasonable to expect Petar to be here 24/7. He has a business to run. Lets use this to get information without it turning into a nut house. Please.
Petar at what point in time did you realize the audit (if it existed) was not in line with the posted financials on the Sulja site?
Petar,
For what factual reason do you not agree with the lawyers? In other words, specifically why have they made a decision to do this? I presume since you do not agree with them that you know why they have gagged Steve. I will call and ask them, but can you tell us??
So you are saying the shares are NOT funded in any way.... If that is not correct, please explain where we can verify funding?
Petar at what point in time and space did you know that Wessal was no longer going to be involved in the SLJB picture?
"A" go back to managing the IHUB board you won't let me on! I got answers so far to questions you won't/haven't asked. This is what "you" need. There will need to be accountability and the board is starting to get answers!
lasernat: Of course the work was done and your statement, although you may think them cute or witty, are not helping you, me or the other shareholders. To answer your question:
About one week after reviewing the figures. Posting total revenues on deals we are simply making a percentage is incorrect. I asked that those figures be removed from the website but was not aware that they were still somehow viewable.
Petar,
Thank you for your time here. Do you still believe that this stock has not been shorted in any large way? Does Sulja receive the NOBO list?
Petar,
thanks for taking my question .
I have a loss of 60K so far .
What good news can you give me to relay back to my family about your company? Also when will the next PR be released ?
These are very important questions Petar and your reluntance to answering them makes you look guilty as hell, please provide answers to them as we all paid for the answers. We deserve these answers.
Petar, if you are not an officer of the company and own no shares, where are you getting your info from?
And why should anyone care what you have to say?
Can't have your cake and eat it too PV.
So you are saying the shares are NOT funded in any way.... If that is not correct, please explain where we can verify funding?
Perhaps I am not understanding you...I thought you were asking if we were supporting the share price by purchasing shares through the corp.
Hello old friend! How's that black Maserati treating you? Andrew as you know isn't too happy with the mess you've created. A blog? Clever use of an I.R. tool. Still working the non-shareholder angle.
Are there any solid dates or expected dates as to when the financials will be released? If the lawyers say you guys cannot release the information, did they say when it can be released? And if so, when?
I know you say "soon" or "as soon as" or other similar words and phrases, but they have been used for months now and I was just wondering if there were any solid dates for anything at all.
insider...I don't know. I am simply providing you with info that I know to be true. Take it any which way you like. I felt that I may owe it to you.
Petar at what point in time and space did you know that Wessal was no longer going to be involved in the SLJB picture?
You say you did not own shares but did Consultech or Kore or any company you had an interest in?
If andrew is so upset...perhaps he could return my calls and express his anger. and yes...it is true..I never had any shares. and what mess might he be referring to?
Petar,
For what factual reason do you not agree with the lawyers? In other words, specifically why have they made a decision to do this? I presume since you do not agree with them that you know why they have gagged Steve. I will call and ask them, but can you tell us??
CHIPHLDR, HOW ARE YOU ENJOYING YOUR PUMP AND DUMPED GAINS?
PV, you answered one of my questions with:
3)those records are kept by kore, sulja and sulja lawyers.
This was in respect to where the sellers of company shares records are kept. How did KORE, or someone in KORE become a trustee and get shares?
wessel may still have a role in sulja...these are details that are being worked out. We felt that sulja should be steering the ship...that's all
Petar perhaps you missed these 2 posts:
Petar at what point in time and space did you know that Wessal was no longer going to be involved in the SLJB picture?
You say you did not own shares but did Consultech or Kore or any company you had an interest in?
This was by agreement with sulja flippertilldeath
Is Steve Sulja still at this point in time the Acting CEO of Sulja. And if so have there been any further talks of a New CEO
Yes, I understand that. Okay
Here are my 2 questions:
1. Who is Wessal? Please provide info that we can verify.
2. If they are no longer involved, why hasn't sljb pr'd this.
Chiphldr/Chad Curtis just bought a 2 million dollar home and a Ferrari.
Petar got a Maserati.
PPS is @ .015 and no one sold shares? But float went up by 500 million shares...
Can't we get some honest answers here? on who dumped and when?
Thank you guys
NO...none of my corps anywhere on this planet owned shares of sulja other than through trust agreement. This is easy enough to show any regulators.
Petar,
For what factual reason do you not agree with the lawyers? In other words, specifically why have they made a decision to do this? I presume since you do not agree with them that you know why they have gagged Steve. I will call and ask them, but can you tell us??
Maserati?....I have many vehicles and properties and have long before my involvement in sljb....I'm sure chad also was making money long before sljb...many people have these things.
Petar will you be at the meeting with Steve and Airys and stock hog, and do you know when that will be. Thank You.
concerned....I am actually hoping that these lawyers are basing their decisions using some level of intelligence. I have no factual reasons.
PV, I appreciate you answerring my questions, honestly, I do. You are obviously getting hammered on some because of the events we are all aware of.
I need to clarify, for myself, if the share vehicle is funded and how?
Also, Sulja needed $7mil to pay off debt. The company has aprox 192mil shares, non-restricted, remaining. $5mil from the selling by trustees is located where, in SLJB's bank?
Jerry: If I am asked....I will attend.
But you were Petar the painter not too long ago.
I do not know many painters who buy so much property and so many cars....
Petar perhaps you missed this post:
Petar at what point in time and space did you know that Wessal was no longer going to be involved in the SLJB picture?
Petar, any idea when the lawyers will let some of those PR's loose that was sent to them. Thanks
lasernat,
this doesn't directly answer your question but petar commented on wessal:
pnv said...
wessel may still have a role in sulja...these are details that are being worked out. We felt that sulja should be steering the ship...that's all
flippertilldeath: All debts that sulja had have since been retired. This was done through the sale of shares and profit. Also, the purchase of sam's was funded by the sale of shares. sljb, to my knowledge, is now debt free aside from a few vehicle leases which is really not a debt. All assets including inventory are free and clear.
I hear one of the insiders is making a deal with the SEC.
Do you know who it might be?
Jerry...I have no idea.
Petar,
First, thank you for cooperating with Airys and Hog, it makes a huge difference. On to my hard questions:
1) Why did SLJB unrestrict and/or sell massive amounts of shares when the price was around .10 per share? Did you/they know it would tank when the audit didn't come out? We need a reason to trust we weren't pump & dumped, as it appears to me.
I understand you didn't own shares personally, but it looks like the company/Steve Sulja made a bundle, and sold early knowing that the confirmed audit release data was not going to happen. THIS IS MY #1 PROBLEM, and I cannot throw support behind the company until I understand this better.
2) When the current assets are proven/audited, and some of the current deals are finished (let's say half), approximately what EPS do you expect SLJB will have? Based on expected information released within the next month.
Peter - can you provide info that we can verify if Wessal exists. At present no one can.
Please do so, especially because you just said that they may still be involved.
I will continue to post this because this is the one answer I am looking for. Thankyou
I actually don't know of any insiders by ownership. And I'm not sure what they would be making a deal on. I really don't believe there to be a problem. But that is simply my opinion of course.
No concerned it does not answer my question.
Petar,
Thanks again for your time. There are certainly some pressing issues at hand. I wish we had the ability to eliminate these uncertanties that we are dealing with. I hope you will agree in saying that we will have these issues answered to the shareholders liking soon.
test
My family will not rest until we see the persons responsible for SLJB stock to go from 9 cents to .01 in handcuffs.
Can't wait to visit Allinone behind bars .
Merry Christmas !
lasernat said...
Petar perhaps you missed this post:
Petar at what point in time and space did you know that Wessal was no longer going to be involved in the SLJB picture?
Petar, I have been constantly asked by many posters if I know anything about how the proceeds of the capitalization was spent. Any way you could fill us in on that? Thanks!
Petar,
In a PR by Steve, the company stated that it had enough revenues at the time to easily go on the Nasdaq.
Does this still aplly?
How soon do you think it will be before we are back to at least where we were before the manipulated crash?
cm3ilongtermer
Are there any solid dates or expected dates as to when the financials will be released? If the lawyers say you guys cannot release the information, did they say when it can be released? And if so, when?
I know you say "soon" or "as soon as" or other similar words and phrases, but they have been used for months now and I was just wondering if there were any solid dates for anything at all.
Mr, is there any HOPE that this will ever get better in 2007????
sophia...I really don't want to sound insulting and that is not my goal here, however, wouldn't you think that I would use a real company if I were trying to pull something?...Of course wessel exists and they are a solid outfit. Their veiw and that of sulja simply differ.
Thank you, for that answer but after those debts were paid,can you approx what SLJB has left for future operations out of the $5mil remaining profit from sales of the shares?
I guess I am asking if the trustees got to keep any? or if not where did the $5mil minus SAM purchase go. It has been reported that SAM was purchased for 500K?
Airys418 said...
Petar, I have been constantly asked by many posters if I know anything about how the proceeds of the capitalization was spent. Any way you could fill us in on that? Thanks!
________________________________
Hey how about that? I have been attempting to these answers already but your welcome to join in!
Petar
Thank you for providing this blog.Many have spent time and money bashing this stock and company management.Why now at such an crucial time silence.I will continue to support this company but just a simple answer would be appreciated.snips007
john....I am sorry but I am no longer in a position to make that call...and I truly think that if steve has learned anything from my mistakes, he will not dare give dates at this time....I am sure that once the first one is out, it will be easier to get the date right....at least within a month of the expected date. Everyone is being careful after I messed it up. I am sure you could understand that.
Airys, what are you his press secretary?
Many broken promises from this company and petar...He better find the time to answer all shareholder concerns.
snips...I really don't know. I think the lawyers are trying to protect the company till all other prs are proven to be factual. This part I understand. They asked that steve not put out a pr simply saying happy holidays. They thought it "unwise". Like I said, this firm represent the corp and I'm sure whatever they are doing, it makes sense to them...Make no mistake, I am not in there good books at this time.
petar, as part of the debt payment (the 7mil) did kore or consultech receive any money?
Peter why will you not answer this question of mine, what date was the deal with Wessal was discontinued ?
Sorry Petar ,
BUT you have not given us shareholders one positive response about upcoming deals and/or PRs.
You need to come clean or your freedom might certainly be in jeapordy.
Petar,
and just one more thing .
Your web site sucks !
Petar,
When you get the details about the OSC letter, will you post that info here? Thanks
insider...I really don't have to be here...trust me...many on this side would rather I not be here...and besides th afs...what promises have been broken. The management of sljb is doing a great job but nobody want to recognize their efforts. They are expanding, working toward completing afs, and looking toward the future despite the ranting of numerous shareholders and drunken reporters. Why not try standing behind the company you have chosen to by shares in instead of looking for a fight at every turn? At this time I believe constructive comments are far more useful then destructive. What have you got yo gain by slamming the efforts of sljb management?
I understand that. You are not insulting me. But I and noone else can find any info on them. If someone said, why don't you invest in my company, you would want to know some facts about that company..that's a pretty standard policy. That would make you smart. This is not about you. This about SLJB being transparent. I would think you would want to provide us with that transparancy?
So I will ask again, please provide info on Wessal..who are they? This is not an unreasonable question by any means. If it is, then we have a problem here.
Tell me about the trustees please. Who are they, who appointed them and what the hell are they doing ?
Let's stop the harassment, okay? PV is here voluntarily.
concerned...I really do not know what I can or can not do with it. I will find out though and if it is permitted, I will post.
Petar,
I think you need to consider telling the authorities all you know about Andrew, Chad, and Dennis before it is too late.
....all imo.
perry...not sure what they are doing now however, I am sure that they are not trading in sljb and have not for well over a month now.
Petar, have you forgotten all those date certain pr's?
What about the done deal contracts?
Intec?
Cement?
The float?
Wessal?
The share structure?
All that Dubai stuff?
test
Correct me if I am wrong but so from our exchange so far, I get:
1) SLJB debt free
2) SAM under SLJB umbrella also debt free
3) cash on hand = $4.5mil
4) Only you have been told not to sell shares but the trustees can still sell the remaining shares at any time?
Have the lawyers been paid cash or are they receiving shares?
bob....thank you for your concern, however, I am not sure what it is you would like me to tell them. I still see nothing wrong. Now either I am a complete idiot or I still believe that what was done was correct. I am hoping I am not an idiot.
Petar that I can understand.Seems you were put in a position between a rock and a hard place and released information you had no real knowledge how to confirm.It is also clear that the original CPA firm screwd the audit real bad.We as shareholders have taken a big loss so far and do hope this mess can be explained to us so we can make educated decisins how long to hold this stock.I have always felt Sulja was a real and growing company and will remain a shareholder until proven other.Thanks for your response good luck with that Lettar you recieved.snips007
Petar, in case you missed my question, which is critical to me and many others:
1) Why did SLJB unrestrict and/or sell massive amounts of shares when the price was around .10 per share? Did you/they know it would tank when the audit didn't come out? We need a reason to trust we weren't pump & dumped, as it appears to me.
I understand you didn't own shares personally, but it looks like the company/Steve Sulja made a bundle, and sold early knowing that the confirmed audit release data was not going to happen. THIS IS MY #1 PROBLEM, and I cannot throw support behind the company until I understand this better.
Thank you for any reply,
-Shaman
sophia....sljb works with many companies, wessel is simply one of them.
petar, as part of the debt payment (the 7mil) did kore or consultech receive any money?
As noted by others, it would be most helpful if verification of Wessal's existence was provided to shareholders.
Is there any way you can help us with this?
Thank you sir.
Petar or Airys,
Have you set a date as to when you can verify past PR's?
who is WESSAL? where, names, places, locations, phone numbers, factz, plzzz
Petar that is correct you really do not have to be here, however you have chosen to do so. In choosing to do so you had to realize that you were going to be asked many questions. Not only questions that you may like to answer but those you do not really want to answer. We as shareholders have paid and deserve to have those answers! We as shareholders deserve to know when Wessal was out of the picture? We as shareholders deserve to know when Sulja began selling shares into the market? We as shareholders deserve to know when you knew the AF's were bogus as compared to the unaudited financials? It is easy to say let us move on and be constructive now. Because it seems like you would like us to just bury our heads in the sand and not ask these questions.
1) Why did SLJB unrestrict and/or sell massive amounts of shares when the price was around .10 per share? Did you/they know it would tank when the audit didn't come out? We need a reason to trust we weren't pump & dumped, as it appears to me.
I understand you didn't own shares personally, but it looks like the company/Steve Sulja made a bundle, and sold early knowing that the confirmed audit release data was not going to happen. THIS IS MY #1 PROBLEM, and I cannot throw support behind the company until I understand this better.
trust me. I am trying to get to all the questions.
1)first off...we did not sell massive amounts of shares. Try to remember, we believed that we would be able to deliver th afs so why would we sell. Every day the people at sulja go to work including the sulja family. And yes, the company made money from the sale of shares...NOT STEVE...is that not the reason for going public? Sulja went public to expand and in order to expand....the company needed money. It's really that simple.
I think you missed this...
Flippertilldeath said...
Correct me if I am wrong but so from our exchange so far, I get:
1) SLJB debt free
2) SAM under SLJB umbrella also debt free
3) cash on hand = $4.5mil
4) Only you have been told not to sell shares but the trustees can still sell the remaining shares at any time?
Have the lawyers been paid cash or are they receiving shares?
Petar,
In a PR by Steve, the company stated that it had enough revenues at the time to easily go on the Nasdaq.
Does this still aplly?
How soon do you think it will be before we are back to at least where we were before the MM manipulated crash?
i agree . yea, something is still fishy here..
I am down 30K..
lasernat...I am not dodging any questions and would not be here if I didn't think I could offer some answers. I don't expect this to be a love in at this time...It's okay, I am somewhat thick skinned...but I also have to defend my corp and sljb when we are accused of things we simply did not do. I am sure you too understand.
how does the future of SLJB looks like? what do you honestly think?
* star or ***** stars
or no stars at all?
PNV wrote: And yes, the company made money from the sale of shares...NOT STEVE...is that not the reason for going public? Sulja went public to expand and in order to expand....the company needed money. It's really that simple.
You raised all this money based on fake numbers and pr's that were incorrect.
Give the money back and start with the truth, then let's see how many shares SLJB could have sold and what pps highs would have been...
Would this not be the right thing to do?
Hello Petar,
This is WillyWizard. I have profiled SLJB since it was LoftWerks. I have also doubled my position recently. Once this year end tax loss season is over sellers will think twice about selling.
I would like to communicate by phone. My email is willywizard@comcast.net my real name is Hal Engel.I have some info that you might find interesting.
My web site is http://www.willywizard.com You will see a SLJB button on the bottom of the entry page.
Thank you,
Hal Engel aka WillyWizard
1) SLJB debt free
2) SAM under SLJB umbrella also debt free
3) cash on hand = $4.5mil
4) Only you have been told not to sell shares but the trustees can still sell the remaining shares at any time?
Have the lawyers been paid cash or are they receiving shares?
1)yes..aside from a few vehicle leases.
2)yes...sam is now sulja...no longer sams.
3)cash on hand I believe to be about .5 million...I must have missed that one or if I answered 4.5 million, I didn't understand the question.
4)trustees have no more shares to sell...all are being returned to TA.
and finally, the lawyers are all paid by cash.
petar, as part of the debt payment (the 7mil) did kore or consultech receive any money?
this is a yes/no answer, no explanation required
insider....what are you saying? I am saying they are real prs and you saying they are not....let's just stop this nonsense and see where this is leading....I know what is true, you are simply speculating.
Petar you say you are trying to protect the company. In trying to do that you say that you parted ways with Wessel because they wanted more control. As a public company the shareholders are the responsibility of the CEO and its officers, correct? As a public company giving control to Wessel would have resulted in a profitable share price for the shareholders, correct? Then why would you not give Wessel the control outside of some type of ego thing? And yes we still want to know that date certain that Wessal was no longer involved with Sulja? Thank you.
yes
Learning a lot:
1) SLJB debt free, aside from leased vehicles
2) SAM is now SLJB also debt free
3) cash on hand = $.5mil
4) Trustees have no shares to sell so float is 608mil
5) lawyers all paid for with cash
OK, now, shares are backed by the company so the shares have value based on the above, correct?
Where is this documented, in Nevada? Is there a site we can get this info?
(keep in mind this is the basics of the company for any shareholder)
Cash on hand 1/2 million? SLJB bought sams for what 500k? Debt was owed to who by the way?
Float now over 600 million shares.
Math does not compute.
Then again, math and financials was never SLJB's strong point was it?
Is nondisclosure of Wessal info a result of a contractual agreement?
without knowing the details of the deal with wessal, how can you make that statement? As CEO, I did what I felt was better for sljb. Perhaps you would have done differently. Who knows?
Then by all means please elaborate and inform us all.
insider...debt owed to bank and suppliers and leasing companies. Not Kore if that is what you are asking.
Remember....when doing your math, SLJB never had control of 600 million. There was loftwerks before sulja.
This is just astonishing to me.
If I was at a shareholders meeting and asked- who is Wessal? And the company responded - We work with alot of companies, do you think we would not work with a real company? How do you think shareholders would react to that?
So - just so I am clear, you don't feel investors have the right to know who Wessal is?
I am not a basher. In fact, I have held through all this turmoil, I have even defended your company. And now, yes, I am rather insulted this is the response I am getting.
But please, make it clear to everyone here that we do not have the right to know who the companies are that sljb pr's? That is just astonishing to me this is your answer?
I do not understand why you wont answer this question. Wessel was PR'd by SLJB and was going to have an important role with this company and according to your blog here, might still play a role. I am just asking you to provide info on them - it is a very reasonable question to ask.
What date was the deal with Wessal called off? I think we deserve an answer to that question.
'what are you saying? I am saying they are real prs and you saying they are not....let's just stop this nonsense'
real PRs?
- revenue numbers that were withdrawn months later: FALSE
- the statement NOT to touch the share structure: FALSE
- the 350M cement deal: not closed: FALSE
who is telling nonsense here?
Your quote: 'Sulja went public to expand and in order to expand....the company needed money. It's really that simple."
FALSE again: Companys with a 25 yr track record dont need to go public and screw shareholders to get money.. They can get loans from banks and institutions.
Post a Comment