of a pre-conceived criminal plot gone wrong.
Thanks Mburns2000:
I wouldn't be so quick to assume that everyone sounding favorable to Global 8 is related the company, in fact I very much doubt that any of us are. I do have a little over $67,000 invested in this company and want them to succeed, but I think if anything I've been a little compulsive looking into their past. None of the dirt sticks.
I have nothing negative to say about you personally, from the sound of it you have a painful story to tell, but that article makes my blood boil. (Shoddy journalism is one of my pet peeves.) I can't respond to any of the statements about Hansen, as I don't know enough of the background, but have researched some of the other areas.
I find Baines' claim that Thermo Tech migrated to the OTC AFTER being driven out of the Vancouver stock exchange a little jarring because the company was actually trading on the Nasdaq BEFORE it delisted from the Vancouver exchange on January 31 1995. I haven't been able to find anything more on the move except for Jim Taylor's statement that "Thanks to David Baines of the Vancouver Sun, it no longer trades in Canada, but it is a Canadian based company so many of the analysts are beginning to visit the Toronto plants and they apparently like what they see." ( J Taylor’s Newslatter reprinted May 29 1997 @ https://siliconinvestor. advfn.com/readmsg.aspx?msgid=1493392)
Who, exactly, is David Baines? I like the following statement Richard Littlemore made when he wrote about Baines in the July 2005 issue of BC Business Magazine: "David Baines still walks the earth, using his position as the Vancouver Sun’s most prominent business writer to scourge old enemies and curry new ones. ... he dug his own big hole, clawing about Vancouver’s financial district for two decades, flinging great clods of mud at every stock promoter, broker, regulator and, lately, lawyer or accountant who ever had passing involvement in an ‘unsuccessful’ stock play..."
Lets move on to Baines' biggest shot against Thermo Tech: "In July 1999, the BC Securities Commission found that Thermo Tech had paid $11.5 million for a 50 per-cent interest in two Ontario transfer and waste management facilities that were valued at only 5.9 million."
If you look up the cease trade order, you'll find it says "the purchase price for the Acquisition was settled with 4,123,380 shares of the Issuer (the “Shares”); prior to the Acquisition, on February 11, 1998, the Issuer entered into an agreement with a Bahamian Company (“Baha Co.”) under which Baha Co. provided the Shares to the Issuer (the “Baha Agreement); the Baha Agreement resulted in the Issuer owing a total of $11,545,464 to Baha Co. (the “Indebtedness”), which amount represented the cumulative value of the Shares based on the trading value of the Shares on Nasdaq on February 11, 1998"
The key fact to note is that the $11.5 million is derived from what the stocks were trading at on February 11th. That was the day the contract was signed. There is a reference in the cease trade order which makes me think he tried to make them look earlier: "in September, 1997 the Related Parties granted Baha Co. an option to acquire from them up to an aggregate of 4.2 million shares of the Issuer.” I'm guessing that the final terms were settled just prior to the signing.
Go Thermo Tech's historical prices @ https://finance.google.com/finance?fstype=ii&q=OTC:TTRIF and look up what the stock was trading at in the days and weeks just prior to February 11th. On January 28th, for example, it closed at $1.28. Had the calculation been made from that day's closing price a newspaper might have stated "Thermo Tech paid $5,227,926.4 million for a 50 per-cent interest in two Ontario transfer and waste management facilities valued at 5.9 million."
It suddenly looks like Rene may have actually been the victim. He wasn't able to explain why he paid twice as much as necessary, but I don't think at should have been the question.
I wouldn't be surprised if he was the largest monetary loser in Thermo Tech's fall. I've read, in another old email (I haven't accessed the old financials) that he owned 10% of the company's stock. Granted that his loss was probably (I'm guessing again) only from profits and many investors lost their life savings.
There may be a great deal more to this story than you realize.
As for the question of whether this company will build plants again, we'll soon see.
Roy