New Message from Kevin

[portrush]

phxgold said:

or possibly Kevin and bill are actually not filing false claims with the nevada court or falsifying documents or posting fake checks uc wrote to casinos or any of that. maybe they are telling the truth and all the other bs is just that...................................bs.

remember that a cort DID issue a TRO AND preliminaty injunction against the defendants in the cmkm case against insiders. ex parte

to do so without a VERY compelling case would be career suicide for a judge.

facts are facts

the only bouncing balls are being thrown by the likes of acca and those balls are full of lies .

Good post, as usual.

Why would he do this? (acca) What possible motivation that includes remuneration would initiate and perpetuate this kind of activity for a revoked pink sheet company? Is it as simple as a maladjusted person trying to take advantage of people's emotions for "kicks"? Or is it a part of a strategy employed by someone else for some specific reason? And if the latter, for what purpose--it is a revoked pink sheet company afterall with presumably no assets.

Rhetorical questions, to be sure...but I've not read a compelling answer to them yet. Maybe someone here can shed some light.

pr

[warpspeed]

lana41092 said:

Personally, I think the Q&A is great and shows that they are attempting to communicate better. Now we can submit our questions directly for answer.

Lana

I would have agreed up until.. I read this part. "The only replies will be auto-responses to acknowledge that questions have been received."

I wish you the best . like every shareholder will and should.
Sir,
Warp-out

[wwjdthrume]

phxgold said:

or possibly Kevin and bill are actually not filing false claims with the nevada court or falsifying documents or posting fake checks uc wrote to casinos or any of that. maybe they are telling the truth and all the other bs is just that...................................bs.

remember that a cort DID issue a TRO AND preliminaty injunction against the defendants in the cmkm case against insiders. ex parte

to do so without a VERY compelling case would be career suicide for a judge.

facts are facts

the only bouncing balls are being thrown by the likes of acca and those balls are full of lies.

HI Phoenixgold, I just have one question for you. What's your take on the number of shares outstanding and in the float being the number that Urban issued. What about the TRILLIONS of shares that Bill Frizzell told the judge about?

There are plenty of CMKX details that I don't know. One thing I feel very confident about is the number of illegal, naked shorted shares in exisitence. I believe the answer Kevin gave is truthful to the extent that he answered it - Truthful, but evasive and not addressing the REAL issue of the naked shorted shares.

As a shareholder I should care about the present management's honesty as much (or more) than the prior management's. I am not convinced that Kevin and Bill are on the side of the majority of the CMKX shareholders.

I want more transparency from them. Saying they are communicating more than UC doesn't improve their performance grade.


IMO-Debi

[lana41092]

Not what I meant. Just meant that if we find our assets and can prove that the company has some value, then those NSS's will have to be covered when start trading again.

Lana

my69z said:

Lana......." If we have no value, then it doesn't matter how many NS shares are out there. "

Not true......."value" or not dosen't give the market the right to over sale a stock

A mandatory buy back of an over issuance dosen't have a cap based on "value"

And if you cruise over Frizz's '05 comments.....you'll notice he adrr'd this very scenario.

Chris

[skibuff]

what was the shareholders party in vegas for if we were so worthless? Why would urban tell people at the races about 54 cents a share and would Robert Mahue really let us get screwed? Who can we trust certainly not anyone it seems! all imho don,t know what to believe ! I am going to reread the prs.