RE:RE:Lets Hopevolume1a,
Actually it was I who sold all of my shares when I discovered that Erin Ventures had "lost" their property. Triple13 was just quoting my post.
What I did was definitely NOT insider trading and this is the case for several reasons.
The definition of an “insider” of a corporation is very broad, and varies depending on the context. It generally includes directors, officers, and significant shareholders of the corporation, as well as others who, in general, may have access to the corporation’s “inside” information. The statutory elements that constitute insider trading are set out in section 76(1) of the OSA and require (i) a special relationship with the reporting issuer; (ii) the purchase or sale of a security of the reporting issuer; and (iii) knowledge of a material fact or material change not generally disclosed. An insider trading violation can only be established if all the elements are proven. Reasons why it's not insider trading.
- The information that I discovered was NOT known by the corporation or any of it's insiders. In fact I tried to tell the company that it was in the process of losing the property and they denied it each and every time.
- I was neither a director, officer, significant shareholder of the corporation, nor did I have access to any of the corporation's inside information. The corporation did not know the information therefore it was not "inside" information.
- I did not have a special relationship with the reporting issuer.
- What I discovered was in fact in the public domain if you looked hard enough. The fact that the company did not know this information has more to do with "corruption" within the government at the time than anything else.
- Other companies knew that Erin Ventures had lost their property which made the fact that Erin Ventures did not know all the more baffling.
- I had no legal obligation to inform the company nor anyone else that they had lost the property because it was something that they should have known and I was not an insider of the company.
I have no problem with a surprise visit from the "Feds".
To clarify, I was neither boasting nor bragging about my sale. I was highlighting the fact that there were individuals who worked very hard to find information about the company when no information was being shared by the company. The information was available if you looked hard enough.
You've seen it yourself, the wild speculation going on here that has little to no basis in fact. I miss the good old days when I could share my DD findings with likeminded individuals and together we could put the pieces of the puzzle together and know what's really going on. I don't do much DD anymore because the path for Erin Ventures is pretty much set. They just has to hit their marks.
As usual, I thoroughly enjoy your posts because they are very insighful and extremely pertinent.
Cheers,
VB