PEDRO's theory?..rebuttal by ..G-Burns

[fastwalker]

:oPedro's theory....(no offense, Pedro)
« Thread started on: Today at 3:04pm » <br>
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
PEDRO's theory?

I received a lot of PMs asking me about Pedro's theory. I enjoyed the fact that he referenced many PRs and other documents in his theory. I disagree with a majority of it though. This is part 1... I will post part II shortly. I mean no offense to Pedro as he spent lots of time on this and it is pretty well thought out.

Quote:*********************** Section 1 ***********************

Will the PPS of CMKX ever reach: “To The Moon?”<br>
No.
Never!

If you are waiting for the PR on the O/S, hoping the PPS of CMKX will reach the Pennies?
It will never happen.

If you are waiting for a PR on the Mother Load, hoping the PPS of CMKX will reach the Pennies?
It will never happen.

Why?
There are 1.5 Trillion Shares of CMKX being traded on the market.
Every time the PPS goes up, shareholders of the 1.5 trillion (shares) will sell.
Selling will lower the PPS.

Why?
The MM’s will never allow CMKX to reach into the Pennies.
Every time the PPS goes up, the MM’s will continue to short sale CMKX into oblivion.
Selling (NSS) will lower the PPS.

In other words:
There are too many shares on the open market (1.5 Trillion Shares).
And, the MM’s can create as many “more” shares as they want.





1. There will not likely be a PR saying the OS. This happens in a filing.
2. There are not 1.5 trillion shares being traded on the market. The ratios indicate an O/S of 779 Billion. The float will be lower. (I am talking legitmate float)
3. By continuing to issue NSS the MMs are screwing themselves. They will realize this at one point or another, with every passing record date.


Quote:*********************** Section 2 ***********************
What do we know about the Carolyn Core Analysis?

Nothing!

What do we know from the Canadian JV Partner’s PR?
www.sedar.com/csfsprod/data47/filings/00659963/00000001/u%3A%5Cpinechannel%5CNRjune15.pdf

Five (5) holes were drilled.
Let’s break down each drilled hole separately by percentages.

Hole #1 = 20%
Hole #2 = 20%
Hole #3 = 20%
Hole #4 = 20%
Hole #5 = 20%
Total = 100%

Only two (2) Holes were sampled
(The results are for holes #1 and #2).

Of these two holes sampled, only 50% of each hole was sampled
(The samples are of split NQ, and the other half of the core has been retained in a secure warehouse).
Therefore each hole should be broken down into “Sampled” and “Not Sampled”<br>
Hole #1 = Sampled = 10%
Hole #1 = Not Sampled = 10%
Hole #2 = Sampled = 10%
Hole #2 = Not Sampled = 10%
Hole #3 = Sampled = 0.00%
Hole #3 = Not Sampled = 20%
Hole #4 = Sampled = 0.00%
Hole #4 = Not Sampled = 20%
Hole #5 = Sampled = 0.00%
Hole #5 = Not Sampled = 20%
Total = 100%
Add up the percentage “Sampled” and percentage “Not Sampled:”<br>Sampled = 20%
Not Sampled = 80%

20% of the drilled samples have been tested for “Diamonds.”<br>80% of the drilled samples have NOT been tested for “Diamonds.”<br>
0.00% of the drilled samples have been tested for “Other Valuable Materials.”<br>100% of the drilled samples have NOT been tested for “Other Valuable Materials.”<br>




1. What this has to do with the theory... I don't know.
2. Cool thing about being non reporting... you don't have to report. No public shareholder knows what has been sampled/tested.


Quote:*********************** Section 3 ***********************

What do we know about the UCAD Stock Dividend?

The good part about the UCAD Stock Dividend is that we know the “Issued and O/S Shares of CMKX.”<br>
www.otcbb.com/asp/dividend.asp?sym_id=CMKX&dDate=08/20/2004&sDateType=Record_date

What is the Issued and O/S Shares of CMKX?
(7,500,000) / (0.00000962) = 779,625,779,626

The Issued and O/S Shares of CMKX is: 779,625,779,626 Shares

How many shares of UCAD will we receive?
(1) / (0.00000962) = 103,950

We will receive one (1) share of UCAD for every 103,950 shares of CMKX

What we DO NOT KNOW is:

What are the Restricted Shares of CMKX?
What is the Tradable Float of CMKX?




Correct. But you said there was 1.5 trillion shares trading above.

Quote:*********************** Section 4 ***********************

What do we know about the CIM Stock Dividend?

Before we continue, you must understand the ratio structure of the CIM Dividend.

Normally a dividend ratio is calculated by using the “Issued and O/S Shares” of a company. Just like UCAD above.

However, CIM is different.

The CIM Dividend Ratio is calculated by using the “Total Shares Owned by All Shareholders.”<br>
You need to understand the wording of the PR that was issued.
The key words are:
----- Pro Rata
----- All CMKM shareholders

biz.yahoo.com/bw/040719/196042_1.html

What is UC doing?

Let’s use this example:

There are 1.5 Trillion Shares of CMKX on the market.

Hypothetically, I personally own 150 Billion Shares.
Therefore, I would own 10% of all CMKX shares on the market.

Forget about the percentage (%) based on the A/S of 800 Billion Shares.
Forget about the percentage (%) based on the O/S of 779.5 Billion Shares (from UCAD above).
Focus only on “All CMKM Shareholders,” all tradable shares on the market, all shares owned by all shareholders. All of the Real and NSS shares on the tradable market.


Hypothetically, I personally own 10% of all CMKX shares on the market.
There are 40 Billion CIM Shares available for the dividend.
My CIM Stock dividend would be 10% of 40 billion shares available.

My portion (percentage) of the 40 Billion Shares would be: 4 Billion Shares.
(40,000,000,000) x (0.10) = 4,000,000,000

UNDERSTAND THE PRESS RELEASE
READ THE WORDS IN THE PRESS RELEASE

UCAD Stock Dividend states:
7.5 million shares of UCAD. CMKM Diamonds, Inc. will later issue these shares to all shareholders of record

biz.yahoo.com/bw/040718/185046_1.html

CIM Stock Dividend States:
40 billion shares … will distribute pro rata as a dividend to all CMKM shareholders of record

biz.yahoo.com/bw/040719/196042_1.html

There are three reasons why UC is calculating the CIM dividend ratio based on “all CMKM shareholders” on the market:
-- 1. UC wants everyone to receive the same percentage of CIM ownership, as each individual currently owns in CMKX *** (same percentage based on all shares of CMKX on the market).
-- 2. CIM is a private company *** (is not currently traded on the market).
-- 3. Will eliminate any NSS Stock Dividends paid on CIM *** (or eliminate any NSD, Naked Short Dividend paid).

Remember, UC is trying to avoid a NSS problem with CIM.

Issuing CIM Stock Dividends to CMKX NSS Shareholders would create a NSS problem with CIM.
(Or a NSD problem – Naked Short Dividends)

The good part about the CIM Stock Dividend is that we know the “Total Shares Owned by All Shareholders.”<br>
www.otcbb.com/asp/dividend.asp?sym_id=CMKX&dDate=08/31/2004&sDateType=Record_date

What is the Total Share owned by “All CMKM Shareholders?”<br>(40,000,000,000) / (0.0256) = 1,562,500,000,000

The Total Share owned by “All CMKM Shareholders is: 1,562,500,000,000

How many shares of CIM will we receive?
(1) / (0.0256) = 39

We will receive one (1) share of CIM for every 39 shares of CMKX

Based on the information from the UCAD dividend above:
Based on the information from the CIM dividend above:
We know the Illegal NSS shares of CMKX.

(1,562,500,000,000) – (779,625,779,626) = 782,874,220,374

The amount of CMKX illegal NSS shares on the market: 782.8 Billion Shares.





Interesting and assuming. Pro-rata could mean he distributes 20 billion now and 20 billion later. I beleive someone called the transfer agent and confirmed this. I did not call so I can not confirm. I was thinking this way last week, but then changed my thinking on the word, "pro-rata". Half now, half later. I do not agree with any theory in which the market makers are helped out. Roger Glenn is of the mental capacity to put these guys through the ringer.

To be continued....

[fastwalker]

:oThis is part II. I left off the last section cause it is just talking about what he thinks will happen in the future. This part has huge errors.
Quote:*********************** Section 5 ***********************

What do we know about the GEMM Stock Dividend?

The good part about the GEMM Stock Dividend is that we will reconfirm the “Issued and O/S Shares of CMKX.”<br>
The GEMM Dividend has been broken down into two (2) dividends.

The first GEMM stock dividend will be the distribution of 95,502,027 shares.

biz.yahoo.com/bw/040802/25741_1.html

A = Total GEMM shares available for distribution = 95,502,027 shares.

B = GEMM Dividend Ratio = 0.00012267

www.otcbb.com/asp/dividend.asp?sym_id=CMKX&dDate=10/01/2004&sDateType=Record_date

C = Issued and O/S of CMKX

(A) / (B) = C
(95,502,027) / (0.00012267) = 778,527,977,501

With the first GEMM Stock Dividend:
The total Issued and O/S Shares of CMKX is 778.5 Billion Shares.

The second GEMM stock dividend will be the distribution of 127,336,036 shares.

biz.yahoo.com/bw/040802/25741_1.html

A = Total GEMM shares available for distribution = 127,336,036 shares.

B = GEMM Dividend Ratio = (Unknown - Has not been published).

C = Issued and O/S of CMKX

(A) / (B) = C

(127,336,036) / (B) = C

With the second GEMM Stock Dividend:
The total Issued and O/S Shares of CMKX is (unknown at this time) Billion Shares.




Correct. Cool thing about this one is that it shows an almost 1 billion decrease in the O/S since the record date for the UCAD

dividend.


Quote:*********************** Section 6 ***********************

What do we know about KPG, UCA and Shane Resources?

We know that a JV Partnership already exists with CMKX.

Thanks to “PFWATTS” on the RB Board for providing the below link showing that UCA, KPG and Shane Resources each owns 10% of

CMKX Mineral Rights.

thediamondhunter.com/companies/popnews?newsid=5777

Did you know that the Board of Directors on these three companies is related?

Are all these three companies a separate business entity?
Or are these companies going to become one (1) company in the future?

United Carina Resources (UCA)

Number of Directors – Three (3)
www.sedar.com/csfsprod/data46/filings/00648013/00000001/C%3A%5CFILINGS%5CUCANTC-03.pdf

Names of Directors:
Richard Walker
Richard T. Kusmirski
Mike Magrum
www.sedar.com/csfsprod/data46/filings/00647857/00000001/C%3A%5CFILINGS%5CUCAbdec03.pdf

Consolidated Pine Channel Gold (KPG)

Number of Directors – Three (3)
www.sedar.com/csfsprod/data44/filings/00623443/00000001/C%3A%5CFILINGS%5CPCNTC-03.pdf

Names of Directors:
Richard Walker
Richard T. Kusmirski
Mike Magrum
www.sedar.com/csfsprod/data44/filings/00623439/00000002/C%3A%5CFILINGS%5CpcBoct03.pdf

Shane Resources

Number of Directors – Four (4)
www.sedar.com/csfsprod/data46/filings/00647714/00000001/C%3A%5CFILINGS%5CSNTC-03.pdf

Names of Directors:
Richard Walker
Mike Magrum
Stephen Marks
Wayne Sanderson
www.sedar.com/csfsprod/data46/filings/00647821/00000001/C%3A%5CFILINGS%5Cshbdec03.pdf

What about the Canadian JV Partners (KPG, UCA and Shane Resources)?
These companies are traded on the Canadian Stock Exchange.

If these companies want to be traded on the US Market, the companies would have to purchase and/or set up a US Publicly Traded

Company.

UC will not issue Stock Dividends in a Canadian Market Company.
UC will issue Stock Dividends in a US Market Company.





Excellent DD, horrible Interpretation. These JVs DO NOT OWN 10% of CMKX mineral rights. They own 10% of a small part of CMKX

mineral rights. The following excerpt is from the FORM 53-901.F filed with each of the JVs in consideration of the 10 percent number.

"The Issuer reported that it had entered into an option agreement with Casavant Mining Kimberlite International to earn a 10% interest of 82 mineral claims located in the Fort à la Corne area of Saskatchewan."

That means they can earn 10% interest on 82 of our claims. We have much more than 82 claims. The map (http://www.casavantmining.com/locations.asp) shows the 82 claims that we own jointly with KPG, UCA, and Shane Resources. They own 10 pecent of the red squares only.



Quote:*********************** Section 7 ***********************

What do we know about SGGM?

Nothing!

Will we ever receive the 200 Billion Shares as a stock dividend?

In the short term – NO
In the long term – YES

Why will we not receive the SGGM shares as a dividend in the short term?

These shares will look great on the CMKX Balance Sheet.

If SGGM is trading at 0.25 per share;
(200,000,00,000 shares) x (0.25 pps) = $50,000,000,000

To learn more about the SGGM Valuation on the CMKX Balance Sheet and Financial Statements, go to this link.

ragingbull.lycos.com/mboard/boards.cgi?board=CMKX&read=605105

Imagine CMKX issuing their financial statements. Recorded on the financial statements is an asset (investment) in SGGM worth

$50 Billion Dollars. Imagine how enticing this Balance Sheet would look for new investors.

Then if we added up the mineral rights valuation on the Balance Sheet (Financial Statements), imagine the valuation of total

assets that would be recorded?

We need to keep in thought the Press Release dated September 24, 2004.

biz.yahoo.com/bw/040924/245464_1.html

Glenn said, "The company's accountants are working to complete the audit of the company's financial statements.

This audit will disclose the valuation for the Quarter Ending September 30, 2004.

Why we are receiving all the stock dividends after September 30, 2004?

Increase the valuation on CMKX Financial Statements (Balance Sheet).

Note: This shell company is the type of scenario that our Canadian JV Partners could execute if they wanted to become a

publicly traded company in the US Markets.




This balance sheet stuff is crazy. Any institutional savy investor could rip this apart in a second after glancing at it if they decide to list the shares before dilution as 50 Billion dollars.

continued....

[fastwalker]

:oQuote:*********************** Section 9 ***********************
Will CMKX ever have an R/S?

No!

Why?
Because of the Nevada Minerals Transaction!
Because UC has just donated his personal CMKX shares to charity!

Nevada Minerals just sold CMKX the Mineral Rights to 500 Thousand Acres.
In exchange, Nevada Minerals received 75 Billion Shares of CMKX.

Although the purchasing contract is not available for review, the purchasing contract between CMKX and Nevada Minerals would

have a clause and/or stipulation stating that CMKX would not do an R/S (or “no” dilution clause).

Why?
Because if CMKX did an R/S, Nevada Minerals 75 Billion Shares would be reduced!
Because if CMKX did an R/S, Nevada Minerals would loose equity in CMKX!

Nevada Minerals would not “give away” their assets without protection.
Thus, if CMKX did an R/S, the 500 Thousand Acres would go back to Nevada Minerals.

UC just gave away Billions of his personal CMKX Shares to charity and the needy.

If UC did an R/S, after donating the shares, the donated shares would have little value.

This would really make UC look like an idiot!

So there will be no R/S on CMKX.




I find this part funny. Most people hate the idea of a reverse split because they have fallen in love with owning millions of shares. When a reverse split occurs the share price goes up Proportionately to the split. 1 for 2 reverse split... means that you have half the shares at double the price. The value is the same. Nevada minerals WOULD NOT LOSE equity in CMKX as all shares would be effected by the split and they would still own the same percentage of the shares. Pedro says that the donated shares would have little value after a R/S... not true... they would have the same value as before. This would not make UC look like an idiot. I am personally against an R/S but it would have very little impact on my holdings as splits are tranparent.

Quote:*********************** Section 10 ***********************

What is happening to the Mineral Rights of CMKX?

The Mineral Rights of CMKX are slowly being transferred to other companies.

So far 60% of the Mineral Rights have been allocated.
We still need to allocate the other 40%.

What are the percentage breakdowns?
10 % = KPG
10 % = UCA
10 % = Shane Resources
15 % = UCAD
10 % = CIM
05 % = SGGM
?? % = any other companies (we can only guess at this time)

1. ----- KPG ----- Link on purchase of 10% interests in CMKX.

www.sedar.com/csfsprod/data40/filings/00577161/00000001/s%3A%5Crwalkerco%5CF53PINE.PDF

2. ----- UCA ----- Link on purchase of 10% interests in CMKX.

www.sedar.com/csfsprod/data40/filings/00577277/00000001/c%3A%5CF53carina.pdf

3. ----- Shane Resources ----- Link on purchase of 10% interests in CMKX.

www.sedar.com/csfsprod/data40/filings/00577152/00000001/s%3A%5Crwalkerco%5CF53SHANE.PDF

4. ----- UCAD ----- Link on purchase of 15% interests in CMKX.

biz.yahoo.com/bw/040718/185046_1.html

5. ----- CIM ----- Link on purchase of 10% interests in CMKX.

biz.yahoo.com/bw/040719/196042_1.html

6. ----- SGGM ----- Link on purchase of 5% interests in CMKX.

biz.yahoo.com/bw/040902/25192_1.html

Eventually 100% of the CMKX Mineral Rights will be transferred to other companies.

In exchange, CMKX will receive shares of stock from the purchasing company.

In return, CMKX will issue to all shareholders a Stock Dividend in those companies.

Everyone who owns shares in CMKX will have the same percentage ownership of the other companies.

What will happen to CMKX?

CIM will purchase the remaining assets of CMKX.

CIM will offer a liquidating cash dividend to all CMKX Shareholders.

CMKX will be liquidated.
CMKX will no longer exist!

No more NSS problem with CMKX.





Again...

10 % = KPG
10 % = UCA
10 % = Shane Resources

These numbers are WRONG. They own 10 percent of a few of our claims. Not all of our claims.


Quote:*********************** Section 11 ***********************

What will happen to all the companies who own the Mineral Rights?

So far we have in ownership:
10 % = KPG
10 % = UCA
10 % = Shane Resources
15 % = UCAD
10 % = CIM
05 % = SGGM
?? % = any other companies (we can only guess at this time)

At some time in the future, look for a major merge of all the companies listed above.

Since we were all issued specified percentage of stock dividends in the above companies, we will end up with a specified

percentage of the merging company.

Again. The percentages of ownership are incorrect. Major merge... maybe.

[fastwalker]

:oRe: Pedro's theory....(no offense, Pedro)
« Reply #7 on: Today at 4:02pm » <br>
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
slayer

There are two concepts on the dividends.

UCAD = ratio was based on the O/S
GEMM = 1st payment = ratio will be based on the O/S
GEMM = 2nd payment = ratio will be based on the O/S

CIM = ratio was based on O/S plus NSS




O/S = 779 Billion Shares

O/S plus NSS = 1.5 Trillion Shares




Remember that CIM is a private company personally owned by UC.
UC can do whatever he wants with his own company (CIM).

If UC wants to give CMKX Shareholders real shares in CIM, even to those investors who are holding NSS CMKX shares.

Real CIM shares to everyone.

[fastwalker]

:oon Today at 4:02pm, Pedro2004 wrote:slayer

There are two concepts on the dividends.

UCAD = ratio was based on the O/S
GEMM = 1st payment = ratio will be based on the O/S
GEMM = 2nd payment = ratio will be based on the O/S

CIM = ratio was based on O/S plus NSS




O/S = 779 Billion Shares

O/S plus NSS = 1.5 Trillion Shares




Remember that CIM is a private company personally owned by UC.
UC can do whatever he wants with his own company (CIM).

If UC wants to give CMKX Shareholders real shares in CIM, even to those investors who are holding NSS CMKX shares.

Real CIM shares to everyone.

Has anybody on this board called JEFF at the TA and asked how many CIM shares were delivered for the CIM dividend? If someone does... we can put this to rest.

[fastwalker]

:oGeorgeburns

I always say that people have a right to their own opinion.

But I find it a bit odd that you disagree with every issue on my theory.

That's you opinion and I will leave it at that!

ps.
UCA, KPG and Shane Resources:
Check up on the material changes that were filed in the past 4 months. In addition to the "secret" meeting that was held in Canada a few months ago.


on Today at 4:08pm, Pedro2004 wrote:Georgeburns

I always say that people have a right to their own opinion.

But I find it a bit odd that you disagree with every issue on my theory.

That's you opinion and I will leave it at that!

ps.
UCA, KPG and Shane Resources:
Check up on the material changes that were filed in the past 4 months. In addition to the "secret" meeting that was held in Canada a few months ago.



I really mean you no offense... I just was trying to show the parts of your theory that were incorrect. I didn't disagree with every issue. I only disagreed with...

CIM dividend ratio (this can be proven with a phone call to the TA)
and Ownership of CMKX. (this was proved in the documents that you provided. There has been nothing since to show that they own more of CMKX than the documents that you provided show. The documents that you provided show ... that they do not own 10 percent of the entire CMKX mineral claims... they show that they only own 10 percent interest in 82 claims.)

If you can prove me wrong... I would really appreciate it. I mean you no offense...

I just don't think people need to read something that looks legitimate and has references that were interpreted incorrectly. Because after they do this... their future theories and thoughts will be clouded with bad information.

This is similar to what happened with the way the people were thinking about UCAD. UCAD bought a 51 percent controlling interest in GEMM... someone posted that UCAD owned 51 percent of the OS of GEMM. Everybody started thinking this way. Come to find out... UCAD does not own 51% of GEMM... the just bought preferred shares which at the time gave them a 51% controlling interest.

If I put out incorrect information. I am glad when someone can correct me. That way future thoughts and theories will not be based on my incorrect information.

[fastwalker]

:oon Today at 4:08pm, Pedro2004 wrote:Georgeburns

I always say that people have a right to their own opinion.

But I find it a bit odd that you disagree with every issue on my theory.

That's you opinion and I will leave it at that!

ps.
UCA, KPG and Shane Resources:
Check up on the material changes that were filed in the past 4 months. In addition to the "secret" meeting that was held in Canada a few months ago.



I just checked up on the recent filings of United Carina and their latest financial statement filed in May does not show that they have increased or decreased their dealings with CMKM.
www.sedar.com/csfsprod/data46/filings/00648051/00000001/C%3A%5CFILINGS%5CUCA2003.pdf
I also read the last five material change reports and found no mention of them gaining any of CMKM's claims.
United Carina Resources Corp. Oct 12 2004 Material change report - English PDF 12 K
United Carina Resources Corp. Oct 1 2004 Material change report - English PDF 10 K
United Carina Resources Corp. Sep 30 2004 Material change report - English PDF 10 K
United Carina Resources Corp. Jun 23 2004 Material change report - English PDF 98 K
United Carina Resources Corp. May 13 2004 Material change report - English PDF 95 K

www.sedar.com/search/search_form_pc_en.htm

How do I check on the "secret meeting"?
« Last Edit: Today at 5:04pm by georgeburns » <br>

I'll take a shot at it. If you have 10 million shares at .0002, and they reverse split so that you have 5 million at .0004 - it's true the value is the same...however if you bought all your original 10 million shares at .0004, you've got half the "potential" earning power you orginally bought in for. Make sense?

[fastwalker]

Today at 3:56pm, georgeburns wrote:I think it's just a bad interpretation of data... the overall theory could be dead on. I don't think that the Canadian JVs will be bought up though.



"the overall theory could be dead on"..lol exactly..

maybe this should have been posted before you did a spot by spot critique ..but I'm sure Pedro has thick enough skin to take it.

(the following is not directed at you george)..

The main point I have been making in all of this..is that we have seen perhaps a thousand theories fly through this board..and out of the thousand..NONE in my opinion has spelled out everything correctly..

and the majority don't have much of anything worth remembering..

We are so quick to discredit a theory based on what doesn't work (and I know there is a place for this)..but I think we should start underlining more of what does work..and sometimes go from there.

We may miss something of substance if we throw the whole thing out..

people don't need to agree with Pedros complete theory..and for me the fact that the math was wrong in the beginning of the post..this does not effect other areas of the theory.

I've read some theories where there are many many mathematical assumptions and one builds on another..and by the time you are through..the end makes no sense because the math was flawed to begin with..but when we are dealing with larger concepts and not just math..it is easy to discredit the math and then others feel the whole theory is discredited..

anyway..that is my rant..(almost done)..lol

IMO I think people put way too much faith in thinking someone is going to come on this board and spell it all out for them. What if only a part of Pedro's theory comes true..AND whats remaing of cmkx also goes up due to a short squeeze (i.e. started by a cash dividend.) He!! this stock could take so many different twists and turns..no body has the corner on the market when it comes to speculating.

For the record..we have some brilliant minds trying to figure this out..and some of the posters I respect include george, DrD and yes even Sterling (but Sterling has a serious editing problem..lol)..I have no doubt that each of these fine theorists have touched on part of the true story..

If we get a huge short squeeze I will be as happy as anybody here and I won't even be that surprised..but personally I think it makes sense to not put all our eggs in one basket and think that the NS squeeze will be all or nothing..

the fact that we are recieving dividends and that there is more than one way out of this manipulation mess..makes me more comfortable as a shareholder..(thats the conservative part of me)..and then there is a part of me that hopes and expects the shorts to PAY and pay big through a short squeeze..if this happens great..if it doesn't..then at least we have a lawyer and a CEO that cares for the shareholders imo and who will find a way to create value for the shareholders.

Bottom line. Keep an open mind. There..I'm done. lol dd



Most people hate the idea of a reverse split because they have fallen in love with owning millions of shares. When a reverse split occurs the share price goes up Proportionately to the split. 1 for 2 reverse split... means that you have half the shares at double the price. The value is the same. Nevada minerals WOULD NOT LOSE equity in CMKX as all shares would be effected by the split and they would still own the same percentage of the shares. Pedro says that the donated shares would have little value after a R/S... not true... they would have the same value as before. This would not make UC look like an idiot. I am personally against an R/S but it would have very little impact on my holdings as splits are tranparent.

[fastwalker]

:oNo matter how you slice it, the 'market capitalization' is the same. I think that there are many, many ways to view the value in a company - market cap, enterprise value, book value, price to sales, pe and so on. Splitting forward or reverse are neutral to all of these as the effect of the change in the # of shares is offset by the proportional change in price. Moving up in pps from that point is simple supply and demand for the shares, nothing more (see Google price appreciation from the ipo of a lofty $85).

Anyway, I just wanted to add at this point a very funny (IMO) personal experiences...

I have had 3 stocks that have reverse split. Two of them I sill own. The most recent of these was a company called nova communications ... I won't give the ticker to avoid the 'pumper' label... Anyway, nova just split 1 for 100 and, incredibly has more than doubled (maybe even tripled) since then (I am still in the red though lol!). Reverse splits are usually frowned upon...but, there are valid reasons to have them and there have been several other successful reverse splits of companies shares in recent years.

So, either way, imo, don't fret over it. Whatever Urbie and Roger decide from this point on will probably work out for us (I think)... GLTA

[fastwalker]

:oon Today at 6:11pm, ksbradley wrote:Problem I have with all of this is the vanishing of CMKX.
Good theory, but no validity.

GOT CMKX Slogans, banners, bulletin boards all over the place.
CMKX sponsoring NHRA races thru 2006.
New GOT CMKX "TONY BARTONE" paint job for November and December.
CMKX VISA card. With new designs just finished development of. Call and ask what design is going on these cards!

Too many things point to CMKX being around for years to come. Too many theories flying around.
And George Burns(who I admire his thinking) has the gull (after many different theories of his own) to dismiss this one, and call out a different theory on this board about a 1 cent cash offer on the 29th---he calls it "JUNK"
WOW.
Everyone gets on there knees for some guy that refutes any theory but his own---that's JUNK in my eye.

Let's face it--WE ALL have some ideas and theories. Yes, some people have a greater knowledge into the world of the stock market--but that does not make them any more in tune to what is happening behind the scenes.
Anything could happen--anything.
For people to call out other theories except their own--they lose all THEIR OWN VALIDITY right there.

GOOD NIGHT DREAMER BOYS!!!!!!






The one cent post was not a theory. It was a rumor. I did not disagree with the overall theory of Pedro. I didn't point a finger and say, "hes wrong". I pointed out fact from fiction. People pmed me and requested my thoughts on his post. I provided them. I am not bashing pedro or his theory. He just was incorrect in some of the things he was saying. I will try never to call a theory wrong. We never know. I will continue to point out incorrect information in anyones post. Be it Pedro, Dr D, Sterling, Stocklemon, stockwatch, or even you. I understand that I look like an a-hole for doing so, but I would appreciate everyone extending me the same courtesy (sp). If I say something wrong, not factual, or stupid. Please let me know.