December 14, 2018 
 Friday 
 
 

Forum
Topic:
Stock exchange listing

       

Page 1 | Page 2 | Page 3 | Page 4 | Page 5 | Page 6 | Page 7 | Page 8 | Page 9 | Page 10 | Page 11 | Page 12 | Page 13 | Page 14 | Page 15 ]

 By cw3343

09/22/2009  10:09AM

Street Name means the shares are held in the Brokerage's name, for your benefit.

Most places charge a fee to issue out certificates, and/or a fee to hold certificates in the brokerage's vault in your name (local safekeeping).

Most stocks these days are held in Street Name in order to make it much easier to buy/sell/transfer. Although somewhat disconcerting, this has some advantages, unless you are a long-term holder. (Millions of stock certs were lost in the World Trade Center, they are probably still working on figuring all of that out)

If the fees are not too high, try to get the shares issued out to you in certificate form...
 By lj

09/21/2009  7:32PM

I don't have a single stock certificate for any of the stock that I own. I assume that my brokerage has them. When they take my money for the shares, and charge me a commission, I have to imagine that a real transaction took place. I am out of town, but I will check my account tommorrow and get you whatever information that I can.
 By Michael Miller

09/21/2009  12:37PM

To lj, below:

Do you have a stock certificate? If so, what is the certificate number and when was it signed?
 By lj

09/19/2009  10:48AM

I know a bit about one of the recent trades, since I was a part of it. After hearing about the trading of shares at low prices, I placed a good until canceled order in my brokerage account for 2000 shares a .05, and another for .07. The order has been in place since early spring. On Sept. 11, my order for 2000 @ .07 was filled. The seller either offered only 2000 shares for sale, or there was another buyer at .07 that bought the remainder. My order at .05 would have been filled if the shares were offered at .001. I don't know why the shares were offered at market rather than limit, but I know that there was no collusion between buyer and seller, since I was the buyer. The shares of OSTO are often valued at .00 or .01, currently the price is .0001, I suspect they lose value on the market since there are very few trades. I am still unsure why buying shares through a brokerage is "grey market," but if there are questions about the ethics of the trade I will gladly sell the shares to the Sixteen to One Inc. for the .07 I paid for them. This doesn't answer the question about the .001 share price mentioned in previous posts, but it at least leaves open the possibility that the shares are sold at low prices because someone gives up and puts the shares for sale at market, and they sell for next to nothing.

PS

Thanks to the ladies at the office for directing me to an access point at Kanaka Creek on Thurs. The trout were very very small, but the scenery was beautiful.
 By Michael Miller

09/18/2009  7:50AM

Last night I was the guest speaker at the Nevada County Historical Society meeting in Nevada City. Six shareholders were there. Another six people asked me about buying stock. Finding the right answer was difficult. I repeated our history and said that getting a public market is a desire and in our future. I told them about the Grey Market. Their eyes glazed over, so that failed. I said the Company maintained a market for shareholders and non-shareholders. There is no way to explain (briefly) share selling for $.001. Why would those executing those bogus sales take the chance of exposure?

Answer: quick money or unlikely to get caught or ignorant, maybe more. I wrote the following letter to an experienced gentleman I discovered in researching stock markets. He replied rather tersely ďyou might try to call the SEC if you think there has been misconduct.Ē Obviously I had hoped for more.


Dear Mr. Lofchie,
I just finished your report of May 1, 2008, co-authored with Moises Messulan about SROís. Perhaps you would help us with a problem that haunts the company I have been running since 1983. It is Original Sixteen to One Mine, Inc, (OSTO) incorporated in California in 1911. It is the oldest US gold producing company and longest operating mine in North America. It is also very small
.
When the Pacific Stock Exchange gave up its market, we were one of five companies exclusively listed with no place to go. Currently the Pink sheets show OSTO on its Grey Market. Something very strange has been taking place with trades over the years. Recently 10,000 shares sold for $.0001 a share. The next day 15,000 shares were bought for between $.07 and $.15 for an increase of 70,000%. This concerns us as well as shareholders, who have questions similar transactions.

Iíve gotten nowhere from researching rules or ethics applicable to our status and SROís. Are transactions as this unprotected by rules? Your guidance is appreciated. I will reciprocate with one of the best underground experiences you will have at the Sixteen to One mine in Alleghany, California.
Regards,
Michael M. Miller, president

SRO is the self regulatory organization established years ago to assist the SEC by encouraging brokers and dealers to police there own rather than a government agency. Iíve written the SEC with our concerns with no success. Why would it bother? We represent the equivalent of an atom of oxygen in the Pacific Ocean to the stock market industry. Keep searching for answers, friends. Itís interesting, in a perverse way.
 By bluejay

09/17/2009  11:19PM

Those are our shares Rick.

The grey market for our shares is NY is probably, $0.0001 bid and offered at $0.07. If you can buy 10,000 shares at $0.0001 it'll cost you just one buck. It's quite apparent that this market exists to steal from selling shareholders.

I think it's fairly resonable to state that those shares trading are from street name to street name requiring no name changes at the transfer agent. If someone is short then they just borrow from another member or never even deliver the shares, it happens all the time with the regulators looking the other way.

Setting the price at $0.0001 means a couple of things: The seller is being robbed or the short seller, higher up, is making a demonic profit.

The Canadian markets may be many things but one important aspect they do represent is EXPOSURE. Canadian markets are viewed daily by people around the globe. The grey market in NY might as well be a dead-ended alley full of garbage and two-legged relievers.

I believe someone should start marketing gold specimens to the public as outstanding wealth preservers. I have a fair amount of 16 to 1 gold pieces representing part of our family's core investments against possible devaluation and as a hedge against the continuing destruction of our currency's purchasing power. And to boot, if the government calls in the gold then we're protected as we're only holding mineral specimens.

It is absolutely amazing to me that no one is really interested in buying these beautiful rare gold specimens from us. When somebody wakes up they'll be gone in a flash. You all have an opportunity today, right now. When they are gone, they will be gone forever, locked up as a calamity reserve for someone's future financial security.

Some morning we'll wake up to the news of a currency devaluation along with the banks being closed. When this happens all gold related items will make the adjustment to higher levels as our currency holding in the banks will be worth much less in international terms.

Sure, the FDIC insures our dollar bills in the banks but ONE thing they don't insure is maintaining our purchasing power. It's goes completely beyond my understanding why folks continue to keep their wealth in our currency denominated items when China has basically been calling our financial system a complete sham for many months.

According to the words in the Patriot Act, any gold coins worth more than 2 times their spot price are not considered bullion. The better gold specimens from the mine are worth well in the excess of 2 times spot. So, why wouldn't the specimens qualify for exemption if big brother comes calling for your gold?
 By Rick

09/17/2009  8:29PM

Which stocks?
 By cw3343

09/17/2009  2:30PM

2 more trades today, 414 and 5333 shares, both at $0.0001

Listing on Vancouver may not be a very good idea. From what I have seen, the speculation, maneuvering, etc., is even worse than the OTCBB and/pr Pink Sheets. There are so many "junior golds" listed on Vancouver, that it lends to a lot of email, website, and faxed newsletter "pump & dump" schemes.
 By martin newkom

09/14/2009  2:48PM

I believe there is a bank in
Sacto. Valley, First Northern
Bank (FNRN:BB) that has and
still trades on the OTC bul-
letin board. The bank has been
in business for 100+ years.
I understand the cost to the
issuer is much less than being
on an exchange. One might look
in to the idea.
 By Dave I.

09/12/2009  4:49PM

Have you folks thought about being listed on the Canadian Stock Exchange? There is a greater interest in small mine investment in that nation. Also what is future prospectus of development? A detailed future plan of action to increase production.
 By RyanBaum

09/12/2009  8:28AM

Any update on the note that was due in early Summer and mentioned at the Annual Meeting?

Still no willingness to raise capital from shareholders?
 By bluejay

09/11/2009  6:06PM

Its seems like an appropriate time to expand on common thievery. Gerald Celente recently called these kinds of people, money junkies. They, basically, produce nothing and dealing with them comes at a high price.

Just look what happened with the banks in 1980 when Paul Volcker declared war on inflation and raised interest rates to combat it. During the process the banks were allowed to raise the usuary rates(rates charged on credit cards) from just below 8% to whatever they wanted. Following the taming of inflation Congress conveniently forgot, in the bank's favor, to return the usuary rates back in line with pre inflation conditions.

Ever wonder why we can't get rid of our credit cards? The people who can least afford to give away money are being charged anywhere from 20% to 30% on outstanding balances. And let's say that these banks have direct and indirect ties to the Rothchild's. Our money "fee handouts" to the banks could very well be shipped abroad and not plowed back into local economies.

If the usuary laws were returned to historical normal levels we wouldn't be requiring any DC stimulus packages of which we are getting charged for.

Max Keiser says the money junkies are so entenched in this country that it's like have a serious virus in our A holes that we'll never ever get rid of.

Your only hope in protecting yourselves is by having a good portion of your wealth in gold coins, not in safey deposit boxes, but in your own personal custody. It's time to be creative in storing our treasures.
 By bluejay

09/11/2009  5:29PM

Let's put into perspective the trade of buying 10,000 shares at $0.0001 and reselling it at $0.07: that's a profit of 70,000 percent. Let's see, buy 10,000 shares for $1 yesterday and sell it all for $700 today. This is the type of crap that gives the market making profession a reputation that it rightly deserve, THIEFS.
 By Rockroby

09/11/2009  4:06PM

Ryan
Looks like we might have lit a fire and people may start buying into this gold mine.My 30,000 shares cost me from .05 to .75 cents per share so I feel better about it.
I think Mr. Miller would like nothing better then to get back underground with a crew,and I am convinced that he can and will find the most spectacular pocket the mine has ever seen.
Putting California back on the map as a gold producing State.
 By RyanBaum

09/11/2009  2:42PM

Looks like someone bought a couple of blocks today at 7 cents and 15 cents.

Say, is there an update on securing a loan to replace the note that was called at the beginning of summer?
 By Michael Miller

09/11/2009  2:17PM

Whoa, wait and halt this conversation for a second. What did I just read? Did someone actually sell 10,000 shares of stock for $10? I agree with both of the previous entries here about the buyer. If the broker bought the stock or bought it for his client, he scored some fast value.

What about the responsibility of the selling agent for his client to his client? Is there a stock brokerage due diligence code? Is there an enforcement agency to oversee and confront those who screw the client on the sell side?

Iím shocked. Iíll pay the new owner a hundred times profit in one day with a check for $1000, which computes to ďearningĒ an annual percentage rate too high for me to compute.

I just donít get it for following reason as well as well as the obvious.

While the Company is not on any official trading markets, that is not an acceptable excuse. The Sixteen to One has filings with the SEC , it does the required steps that all public companies must take to stay in operation: notices, shareholder meetings, minutes, file corporate papers in Sacramento, keep a web site, keep an office with regular hours, maintain its assets and pay required State of California and Federal taxes. Original Sixteen to One Mine, Inc can be found by even the most illiterate Internet users.

That seller should be prosecuted or lose his or her license to be a stockbroker. Thatís a fact not an opinion.
 By bluejay

09/10/2009  11:32PM

Rockroby

All I can tell you is where the Sixteen to One trades today in NY is just like turning back the clock to the lawless Wild West Days, and playing on their turf, to boot.

The jerk NY market maker who bought the 10,000 shares for a buck is as shameful as they get. Most of the responsibility for this disastrous trade rests on the shoulders of the registered rep who let this trade be executed at such a ridiculous price, $.0001, totally laughable and sad at the same time.

You have no idea at the scum-bags that actually work in this industry today. Many of them take absolutely no pride in their work.

The bottom line for this trade is that the client will have to submit a check to the broker for his commission deducted from the principle amount on the gross trade creating a deficit. Since the Orignal Sixteen to One is, more than likely, not programmed into any broker's computer system for an automatic execution it has to be phoned into the trading desk for special handling and that, these days, costs mucho dinero.

The customer could be charged anywhere from $25 to $65 for this trade. So, in what sense is there any benefit to the customer here? He pays to have someone take the shares off his hands for a tax loss? Give me a break!

If I had to offer an opinion, I would speculate that some evil force put through a wash sale to exert pressure on the current shareholders who have their hands full at the moment with more legal intimidation.

The woods are full of people who think they can steal valuable past producing gold properties for a song and a dance from unsuspecting owners through all types of intimidation ranging from paid for negative news reports all the way up to their government connected buddies.

I have seen numerous accounts of low priced precious metal related companies get continually hosed by big investment firms for fun and profit in Canada to the point where a reasonable person would wonder, where are all the regulators?

We live in a society where morals are losing their age-old value as we witness an historic financial breakdown in this country.

When I was an Exchange broker and was given an order to sell for a customer and there was an absence of buyers I never hit the market makers bid, especially on an inactive stock. I took pride in representing the customer and looking out for his best interests. Many times I called the company and spoke to their Treasurer asking if he knew of any interest to buy shares that were not being represented on the floor. On occasion, it didn't take too long until an order surfaced, sparing customer from the market maker's low-ball bid while saving him a considerable amount of money.

Remember, just like the way the bullion banks sell gold on the COMEX, it's not necessarily their intention to get the best price but it has been mostly their desire to SET THE PRICE.

And WHO does setting the price benefit?
 By Rockroby

09/10/2009  8:52PM

Stock went down today from .01 back down too .0001.
And I still can't buy it on the open market for .85 cents,anyone find out why this is happening yet?
It does seen easier to get through my U.B.S. account just can't buy through online trading.
Gold just went over a thousand dollars an ounce again.Californians have always headed for the hills to make a little extra money during high unemployment and now the State has taken away dredging.I guess that the State would rather have a bunch of pot growers in the hill's(and they can cause a lot of damage)then people looking for gold.
Things must change or this State will find itself in one hell of a lot trouble,well more trouble then it already is.
Let's open up 100 gold mines in this State and put us back on the map as the Golden State.
 By Michael Miller

05/05/2009  9:52AM

To Rockroby and others:
I'm hitting it every day and with all my creative business skills to get us back into gold production. Right now I'm writing the annual shareholder letter, which reviews the past year and offers a look into the future.
I have an activity (started in March) with one real financial party. We are optimistic, but it is premature to go into details. I was very disappointed when the financial crisis disintegrated the interest that was also real. Everyone disappeared. When a loan or other funding is completed, you will know. Until then all I can give you is the fact that after solving problem for our Company for many years, I am not quitting or taking a bad option . Please keep your interest positive. Mine are.
 By Rockroby

05/02/2009  7:56AM

I have had a standing bid in with U.B.S. for 1,000 shares at .55 cents for two months & it won't take.Have also tried Etrade for a dollar a share and it won't take.
Their are millions of ounces of gold waiting to be blasted out of the mines that we the shareholders own,we just need capital and good hard rock miners to get it.
Mike I think most of us know that China will be the only Superpower left if we keep going down the path that we are,
say what you want about Bush but he did keep us safe(it just cost to much to do)and he was not good at lying unlike Obama & Clinton who I now think would have been a better choice.
What we would like to hear from you is that your making some progress in getting back to mining.
Thanks

Page 1 | Page 2 | Page 3 | Page 4 | Page 5 | Page 6 | Page 7 | Page 8 | Page 9 | Page 10 | Page 11 | Page 12 | Page 13 | Page 14 | Page 15 ]

 

  
 
© 2018 Original Sixteen to One Mine, Inc.
PO Box 909
Alleghany, California 95910
 

Phone:   
Fax:
E-mail:
 
(530) 287-3223      
(530) 287-3455
corp@origsix.com
 

      Gold Sales:  


(530) 287-3540

goldsales@origsix.com
 



Design & development by
L. Kenez