Welcome To the WIN!!! St. Elias Mines HUB On AGORACOM

Keep in mind, the opinions on this site are for the most part speculation and are not necessarily the opinions of the company WITHOUT PREJUDICE

Free
Message: Alberta caught off guard by securities regulator agreement

I find this article very interesting in several ways and pertinent to our investment.

We have heard mention of one national regulator before, and here it is proposed again, with seemingly only 2 provinces backing it yet,

http://www.edmontonjournal.com/business/Alberta+caught+guard+securities+regulator+agreement/8933677/story.html

"Finance Minister Jim Flaherty and his counterparts in B.C. and Ontario also invited all the provinces to join them in the proposed system, which they hope to have in place by July 1, 2015."

I believe Mike De Jong, BC,s finance minister, along with perhaps other B.C. politicians, see the possibility of repercussions to the B.C. economy, as a result of the BCSC possibly being sued in the future. Whether its the BCSC,s fault or not, they are responsible for upholding integrity in the markets and regulating the TSX itself, in its actions, or non action. The BCSC is not only responsible and accountable to the BC public, investors in BC companies, but to all Canadians as well. This is a huge undertaking of responsibility, that is supported by 9 commissioners in the BCSC, with about 190 employees total. Not only its responsibilities, but the repercussions if this commission were to be sued.

Its not far fetched to believe there may be reasonable cause for SLI investors to sue this commission under several articles. If this commission was sued for $1 billion plus, from one group of shareholders, you can be assured other groups of shareholders would follow suit with their own class action law suits. This would surely wipe out the BCSC and severly cripple the whole BC economy, and affect all of Canada. Everything is connected, and thats why politicians, nation wide, are so important in what is happening with SLI investors. The whole integrity, confidence and protection of public interest aspects of the markets, is at risk, at this very time. Couple in some interesting corrupt aspects that have recently surfaced, and perhaps more to come, of B.C.,s judicial system, and you will see how complications and perhaps a conflict of interest would arise, for the BCSC allowing such a system rule on matters that it is quite able and authoritively invested, to act upon itself.

I will jump to perhaps a Doug Horner angle here, the Minister of Finance for Alberta, and President of the Treasury Board. http://www.finance.alberta.ca/business/index.html. Doug Horner,s constituency is in Spruce Grove-St Albert, Alberta. He has received numerous letters from SLI shareholders in the past.

If you look in the article, you will see that Doug appears to be oblivious to the proposed national regulator. Now if Mr Horner was indeed concerned with all the Albertans that were getting ripped off by financial market corruption, that he may have been more informed? But perhaps, he should be informed, whereas the Alberta Investment Management Corporation, (AIMCo), is an owner of the TSX and handles Alberta,s Pension monies, upon other things. http://www.aimco.alberta.ca/our_company.aspx.

The Alberta Securities Commission (ASC) also comes into play here. They are responsible for ensuring the Corporate Goverance actions of the TSX. If a compliance officer/director, has failed to act to mitigate risk to investors, upon reasonable evidence, the ASC has the power to take immediate action. The ASC has been in receipt of many letters from SLI shareholders as well, and the ASC says that this is a BCSC jurisdiction, when in fact, they share the responsibility to all investors in/if this regard.

A recent violation by the OTPPB, (Ontario Teacher Pension Plan Board), a member of the Maple Group that owns the TSX, raises an eyebrow as well. They were fined by the SEC, the U.S. regulator.

http://www.bnn.ca/News/2013/9/17/SEC-charges-Ontario-Teachers-among-23-firms-for-violating-short-sale-rules.aspx

As you see above, this is perhaps part of a sweep, that may present more violations of other Canadian Funds/institutions. If so, its possible that groups of U.S. investors may launch class actions against the Exchanges and Regulators here in Canada, deteriorating investor confidence and integrity within the markets. If this happens at a large scale, you could see a destruction of the markets here, like never seen before, and perhaps it would be wise for the Government of Canada to take proactive measures early. Most people don,t realize how everything is just hanging by a thread, hopefully it can be curtailed before the thread breaks. Nevertheless, seeing what perhaps may be signs of the future, it does warrant caution among all investors, especially the retail that are not allowed to short and which can be wiped out so easily in a huge market decline. Shorters make huge bucks on drastic market declines and one just has to realize this, instead of thinking when markets go down, everyone loses. For example; you have heard about the Stock House braggart, that made millions shorting SLI, while many investors savings were diminishing incredibly fast.

Investors may become happy when they see market participants fined and/or sactioned. If you look above, it appears that the SEC received all proceeds from the violation, and none of it was reimbursed to investors that may have actually lost the money, as a result of the OTPPB contributing to a short manipulation. You see no restitution, and the regulator is the one to gain, while investors lose and the perpetrator takes a small loss. The perpetrators still exist, so in actuality, does enforcement really help retail investors? It seems they are victim of crime after crime in these markets, and very little to nothing is ever restituted back to the investor. When investors try to stand up, they are faced with hefty legal fees trying to prove things that the regulators and Governments should be doing, to uphold integrity in the markets, as a degree of assurance is displayed by them. The investors end up losing even more, does the regulators ever lose anything?

In connection to the above, a friend of mine proclaimed the OTPPB actions as a classic. If it is assumed by traders that a PP may be in the books for a company shortly, the trader will establish a short position. It has been stated on the internet before, if you like to do a search, where even MM,s will short a stock before a PP to help get the price lower. The lower a PP is priced at, the greater the chance for better profits. I reflect back to our PP in Aug 2011 that management seemed to have taken most of themselves, and I reflect on the shareprice shortly before it was announced. I believe we were trading around $2.30 per share shortly before that, and saw the PP being announced at $1.80 consisting of a below market pricing of .20. This also came at a time when we were trenching, since May, and it would have been quite reasonable to expect any type of assay results from the end of June on, with no results at all coming out til Jan 2012. I should also mention the words used "agressive " in a couple news releases around that time, here is one excerpt of such;

"“We are delighted with the approval of our EIS. The completion of this EIS is in line with St. Elias’ aggressive exploration program at Tesoro. The Company is now well-positioned to begin its drilling program with cash and encouraging exploration results, including gold assays and favourable targets from a deep penetrating Titan 24 geophysical survey, in hand” Ms. McClenahan noted."

thank you

Love All

rick

Share
New Message
Please login to post a reply