ASC pursues group over Kilimanjaro manipulation
2017-10-18 19:46 ET - Street Wire
Also Street Wire (U-KIMJF) Kilimanjaro Capital Ltd
This item is part of Stockwatch's value added news feed and is only available to Stockwatch subscribers.
Here is a sample of this item:
by Mike Caswell
The Alberta Securities Commission has begun an enforcement action against a group of men for the pump-and-dump of an OTC Markets listing called Kilimanjaro Capital Ltd. The ASC claims that the group boosted the stock with false claims about projects in Alberta and Africa. They then dumped millions of shares, with some of the selling coming after a cease trade order, according to the ASC.
The allegations are contained in a notice of hearing that the ASC announced on Wednesday, Oct. 18. The notice names two U.S. residents and four Canadians as respondents. The group includes Calgary lawyer John Charles Zang and former Calgary broker Richard Kenneth Moore.
The pump-and-dump, as described by the ASC, began in late 2012. According to the ASC, Mr. Zang helped the two men accused of masterminding the scheme, Ashmit Patel and Jonathan Levy, form Kilimanjaro. He assisted them in recruiting a Calgary man, Zulfikar Rashid, to serve as a nominee officer and director for the company. The company purportedly had projects in Africa and claimed to have an interest in an Alberta oil and gas asset.
The remainder is available to Stockwatch subscribers.
Sign-up for a FREE 30-day Stockwatch subscription and SEE NO ADS
© 2023 Canjex Publishing Ltd. All rights reserved.
Reader Comments - Comments are open to paying subscribers of Stockwatch and unmoderated,
although libelous remarks, obscene language and impersonations may be deleted.
Opinions expressed do not necessarily reflect the views of Stockwatch.
For information regarding Canadian libel law, please view the
University of Ottawa's FAQ regarding Defamation and SLAPPs.
The word "outrageous" readily springs to mind.
It's a very sad statement regarding our capital markets that people like these exist and as it appears, readily circumvent regulators with relative ease.
I hope they throw the book at these guys, regardless of whether or not losses were incurred in the scheme.
Kudos to Stockwatch for maintaining apparent integrity. Thank You.
Assuming anyone actually reads these things anymore, I offer a hello to Mr Purcell and Halcro from yesteryear and an old Winspear investor. : )
Been a long time coming but hope to be back in the game fairly soon.
Posted by YeOldeFundamentalThinker. at 2017-10-19 07:14
"Assuming anyone actually reads these things anymore"
Depending upon the subject (especially when Howe Street regulars are mentioned), there is often lively, informed and amusing comment/responses.
I found this article by Mr. Caswell to be quite interesting, especially when the protagonists are run through the Stockwatch database (The roles of Messrs Z Rashid, J C Wang and R K Moore in other publicly traded companies are shown).
Only three-odd years for the ASC to begin the enforcement action, which is certainly impressive when compared to much of the BCSC's record.
"Which had a 2.9-cent high in 2014" is likely the most telling words in the article. In the days of yore, when the markets were more robust, who would bother (and who would respect the botherers) to pump a share to a lofty 2.9-cent high?
Posted by Halcro at 2017-10-19 12:19
I neglected to mention a sincere hello to Mr Lee Webb as well.
Thanks for the research incentive.
As I have always contended, follow the money, as it will lead you to the truth.
To say "playing the game" these days in akin to Russian Roulette is a mammoth understatement imo, (as more chambers are loaded than not imo) and as the overwhelming majority of sheep have almost certainly been fleeced by this stage. Do your own due diligence carries greater import than ever.
In the brief investigation I have just examined Moore, Richard Kenneth (Rick) 2005-03-31 Bought a private placement in Co (www.lemontonic.com), which link, when followed brings you to POF.com; which is just one corp under the umbrella of IAC, formerly Interactive Corp, and from memory, who's former investors included some prominent names, including the family moniker of one past US President and at least one of their prominent supporters (G.S.).
This and many other Stockwatch articles I have read are both interesting and informative and reinforce my need to become more familiar with the players, though, most often I tend to focus on the numbers. Interestingly, of the players I have reviewed, not one of the companies they were connected to has popped-up on my radar, which may be just dumb luck, or perhaps be potentially related to focusing on the numbers. (A question to be answered for another time.)
Yep, it's a mine field that requires sincere effort in DD and forms at least some underlying rationale for the existence of mutual funds, who's management are professionally compensated to maintain an ethical and professional standard. (I could write a novella on that topic, but will spare you... at least for now. : )
Again, I thank Stockwatch for its' continued presence and obvious integrity, which as many Streetwires have attested is often for sale and the regulation for which is notably lacking... I am a firm believer in the supposition that nothing happens without a reason and do plan to be instrumental in promoting an ultimate solution to this issue, if indeed that's even possible... And since numbers never lie, I'm fairly convinced it is.
As a brief teaser... The oft stated axiom is simply buy low, sell high. The basic quandary is, which is which? I believe there is a way to define both ends of the spectrum in mathematical terms, technically, despite contrived volatility. (Just sayin'... Furthermore, I'm convinced there are a very small percentage that are already aware of its existence... and includes some of the most wealthy, globally. Can you envision a world with a truly level playing field and complete transparency?)
As an aside, once, more than 15-16 years ago, I received a very unusual phone call from someone who asked some very pertinent questions of me, and for which I had virtually zero answers. (Shameful to admit my ignorance in certain areas, but we all have our strengths and weaknesses and the considerate and genuinely concerned always have the ability to learn, if they're so inclined. My next foray will almost certainly be in law, with a couple, maybe a few major areas of focus. One is never too old to learn and knowledge is in fact power, after all.) If that guy still has my number, I'd welcome another call. After all, back then, I was a relative neophyte to an in-depth understanding of the game, and whether it be through dumb luck, or pre-ordained, I am still here and standing.
Posted by @YeOlde at 2017-10-20 03:03
Got carried away and forgot to answer the interesting question posed. Given that tax losses do form a part of our infrastructure, this scenario is indeed interesting in that the amounts sold comprise, (perhaps coincidentally, perhaps not), an amount very close to 50% of the reported promotional fee, it appears very much like a win-win situation for someone. The real questions to be answered, (as, given for every dollar earned someone also lost that dollar) who lost? And so begins a spiraling investigation into the pits of hell; and as you rightfully noted, given a 2.9 cent high, who would be inclined to notice, or care if anyone did? (sadly) (None-the-less it is indeed a noteworthy observation, perhaps signaling the end of the game... Interest rates should be rising soon enough, and very, incredibly, gently, so as to witness the effects thereon... which are entirely predictable imo.
Posted by YeOlde at 2017-10-20 03:20
Comments for this item are closed