* CSHD * One Year Later - Page 600  

10mm = 10 million or 10 millimeters?

this is one of the docs i saw at gsccca website, and went "all in"

***Actually the document says delivered to Conversion Solutions. Big difference at this point.

I'll respectfully disagree with your conclusion given the SEC's stance, Benson's apparent testimony that the books were not right, AND the very real possibility that the document you posted from Venz is not authentic.

between that and the bonds prospectus stating it had been increased to 750 million convinced me there was more than enough for cvsu and fidelity (the sec's counter argument) to own a piece of it.

What I find appalling is the sec never depo'd paez to refute the document.

[QUOTE=Checks&balances;1608111]It means he "believes" as in his opinion. Why to you challenge everyones opinion? Does there have to be "profound" conclusion? If I tell you I believe because I have gut feeling...why challenge me? This is a meesage board right? Not a Senate Committe hearing?

***

we must not be looking at the same document, delivered isnt even found on this one.

the second paragraph extends and grants full ownership to cvsu. the last paragraph states that it is to be without any fees or liens against it.

the red flag the sanction talked about was other people owning it. you dont think there was enough capacity in the bond to allow for that? bloomberg only showed some 100 million of the bond, that left 150 million excees when you include cvsu's 500 million of the 750 million of the bonds actual value.

****ok..ok..[extends and grants]............=delivered-----blah-blah-blah.

NOTE: It also says "full ownership". Fidelity says they owned some of it and SEC claims they owned almost a tenth ---according to the transcript---so 'full ownership' as Rufiss claims=poopoo.

The Benson sanction seems to say Conversion never paid anything for any purported bond nor received any interest on any bonds Rufiss claimed.Thus the problem of fraudulent misrepresentation the GOV is charging.

the prospectus shows the bond "portfolio" being increased to 750 million. I.E. theres more than one in there, leaving room for everyone with about 150 million to spare.

What I think we are seeing is 2 separate parts of the bond transference.
1: the bank gave cvsu the bond.
2: the broker expected a piece of the pie, and the 10k reflects that as a debt.

The 2 are separable and can exist independently. The broker is a parasite so to speak, he did not own the bond and could not stop the transfer of ownership.

i can think of one....

I can think of one..

Here's another ...

let's do that inside/outside box thing.
sec says rufus prove you own them. rufus says prove i don't.
rufus says hey sec do it for me.
is rufus saying i wouldn't touch it with a ten foot pole?
is the sec saying the same thing?
what's going on here???????????////

heyyyyyyyyy babyyyyyyyy...

heyyyyyyyyy babyyyyyyyyy....

Originally Posted by DRD...
"Do I have a friend here ..."

***I will even apologize to SOLO again for jumpin on him about him lambasting -you know who---way back when......

Heck---I'll even apologize to Kapone.

actually rufus did so to speak. In the hearing he offered that ownership document as well as the contract and the extension to 1.5 billion as evidence.

what we should be asking is why didnt the sec go any farther than fidelity to prove he was lying?fidelity doesnt own enough to keep cvsu from owning 500 million as well. why didnt they depose paez?

****Problem is---Bensons' testimony will nail down crucial evidence for the GOV that there was no payment by Rufiss/Conversion for the pr'd V bond in the first place.

That is a problem when [a $500 million payment] was disclosed on the 'audited' financial's [statement of cash flows].

And, the company recorded the bond as a $500 million asset on its balance sheet representing 60 percent of the total reported assets of the company. They never mentioned the so called increase.

Not to mention that the 19 mill in interest Rufiss claimed to have received and placed on the books for the 500 mill V bond just hasn't been seen.............by anyone....

Hello Big RRRRRRRRRR hope u had a good weekend ......nice weather here been out side all week end ..

the bond doc states no lien could be placed on the bond present or future. so as far as the bond goes, cvsu owns it. Again the broker is a separate issue and the amount owed to him was listed as a debt.

the interest payment just might be sitting in that bank account set up by the bond trader.

rain, hail, and strong winds here today....