Sinclair and CobalTechSinclair asked me to tell those associated with CobalTech that he wouldn't have any qualms with their methods for raising capital if the company issued speck instead of stock. CobalTech fell under his radar because of the proximity its proposed operations to Kirkland Lake. He feels that CobalTech stock is a "joke." However, he also feels that if the company instead referred to it as speck, that management and investors could participate on a "level playing field."
https://us.blastingnews.com/business/2017/01/the-penny-stocks-of-kirkland-lake-part-six-in-a-series-001366265.html https://hubpages.com/politics/Kirkland-Lake-Cover-up-in-death-of-Mayor-Antoniazzis-sister-in-law https://hubpages.com/money/How-A-Rename-To-Speck-In-2007-Might-Have-Saved-Nadine-Antoniazzis-life "
The problem with the stocks sold by Paul Antoniazzi's companies is that they lose most of their value. If, instead of stocks, Mr. Antoniazzi's companies sold investors options, the situation would be different. Then, investors would understand that they are purchasing a highly speculative investment that is likely going to lose almost all of its value, something that does not appear to be currently understood by all participants on the TSX Venture Exchange. However, there are problems with using the term option to describe the shares of companies like Opawica Explorations and RT Minerals. Others terms, which serve exactly the same purpose, are speck, shyre, speculity, speculation, and inspeculation. For example RT Minerals Corporation could be referred to as RT Minerals Speculation, and its shares as shyres, and stock as speck. Before being allowed to trade in speck, investors could be required to be shown a chart comparable with the Opawica Explorations time-decay chart above, similar to how options investors must be shown the option time-decay chart above. In this way, a higher level of "full, true and plain disclosure," as described by the Ontario Securities Commission, would clearly be achieved."