August 29, 2008     | Register
About our Blogs

Blogs found on this website represent the opinion of the author. For more information please visit our terms of use.

For General Comments and Questions from Today Forward.

Location: Blogs Bud Burrell - Front and Center    
Posted by:   bburrell 9/4/2007 7:43 AM

Post any general questions here.

Best, Bud.
Copyright ©2007 Bud Burrell
Permalink  |  Trackback
Comments (84)
Re: For General Comments and Questions from Today Forward. By Jackie on 9/4/2007 12:41 PM
Bud

Whats the latest on CMKX? Do you still believe that a CMKX settlement is coming and that it could bring down the entire financial system?

Whats new on the 1.5 trillionshares naked short sold in CMKX?
Re: For General Comments and Questions from Today Forward. By bburrell on 9/4/2007 12:33 PM
Mark is almost finished with his book. It will put a lot of scum's trash in the Street.

I don't believe there is any settlement on CMKX, that is a con being perpetuated to keep the pressure off the dirt sandwiches here.

Sorry to be so negative. I hope Mark's book puts these scum in real Prison.
Re: For General Comments and Questions from Today Forward. By Valueinvestor on 9/11/2007 7:32 AM
Bud: I understand that you have no idea what Ms. Moscovitz would do now that she is in charge at USXP as receiver. But, if you may, let us assume for the sake of discussion she moves to deregister the company of file for BK, like you speculated earlier "I expect her to lead the remains of the Company to de-registration and/or bankruptcy, either outcome meaning the shorts don't have to cover". What happens then ? Do the USXP common shares held by shareholders become automatically worthless and irredeemable at any point in the future ? Also, I remember you saying the following on 7/1/07 "If they attempt to de-register the Company, whose reports are up todate, they have to establish a foundation in an action the SEC would have to initiate that would be heard by an SEC Administrative Law Judge, just like Eagletech. USXP would be the big winner if this were attempted, as they would have to be granted discovery. They would love that. Eagletech was handed the keys to the kingdom when they got their discovery, some 49,000+ pages reciting reams of criminal acts by a cast of characters you would never believe. The Bet made by the SEC was that little Eagletech would not have the resources or capability to sort through so much paper. That was a big error in judgment." Is this what could happen to USXP after de-registration ? Again, what remedies can common shareholders look forward to ? Thanks...


Reply: After yesterday, a day of infamy in my personal experience with the slanderous attacks on me from the pro shorting champions, I have no idea what she will do. As a shareholder, and me as a creditor, we can only hope for the best. If she does not bring in money by whatever method, no one gets paid.
Re: For General Comments and Questions from Today Forward. By Valueinvestor on 9/11/2007 8:52 AM
Bud...I too read those posts about you, in those not-so-glorious venues...but I immediately recognized them for what they were worth...pure trash, not even worth spitting on...I would have assumed you would do the same...frankly, I am a bit surprised you reacted to these vermin speaking harshly or falsely about you...you know and I know who is sincere and wants to learn more about this whole sordid mess in the polluted financial markets...who cares what these guys think and say ??? I pray that you ignore these vermin and continue to share freely with the rest of us the privilgege of your God-given expert understanding in these matters, no matter how speculative they may be or how remote you currently may be from the situation ...

w.r.t. USXP and the receiver, you said "If she does not bring in money by whatever method, no one gets paid." I am sorry but I did not get that...bring in money ? you mean by selling off whatever assets she can find ? So what about the records that Richard should have kept that speak to the possibility of the one investor who claimed to own the entire float ? I would have to think you too must have seen some evidence of that...or was it pure speculaiton based on what Richard told you ? Please understand, that all I am attempting on behalf of thousands of stranded shareholders is to get at the truth...where do we stand ? OK, Richard said a lot of things, but the Judge still had his way...but excuse me...we do not live in the Gulag, yet !!! this is still America...I am surprised at the negativity and hopelessness that many exhibit...in a curious sense, I admire the positive spirit that Richard always exudes in this struggle, in spite of the odds he faces...now if only we can be convinced once that he is speaking the truth w.r.t. those Saudi investors/funders, a Saudi Prince in charge of the entire USXP float, etc. - You do not have to answer or post this Bud, but we would all appreciate it if you did give us the benefit of your wisdom in these matters...thanks as always and God Bless..


Reply: Your analysis is correct. She must materialize assets for conversion to cash to manage the estate.

Receivership is very complex. I would tell you that the former Counsel for the Company says Moscowitz is a very good lawyer, and he is no soft sell.
Re: For General Comments and Questions from Today Forward. By mulder on 9/11/2007 9:19 AM
Hi Bud, what chance does USXP have with the court appointed Jane
W. Moscowitz? She obviously is working to shut this company down and to not find the truth. With RA out of office it looks like she will stop all the appeals. What can RA and or the shareholders do at this point or do you feel we are at the mercy of Ms. Moscowitz.

Reply: I don't know her, other than she represents Harry Leopold, and therefore, I can't comment any further than I have. The former counsel for the Company gives her high marks as being a very good lawyer. I have a personal problem generally with lawyers for bad actors, but that is my problem, and may not be wholly relevant here. Where we stand on Oct 15 will tell the whole story.
Re: For General Comments and Questions from Today Forward. By Mulder on 9/11/2007 2:15 PM
Hi Bud, What happens if Ms. Moscowitz does put us out of business before Oct. 15th? Then shorty will not have to cover or is there another way to make them cover? Being a Shareholder can you give me any sugestions on anything we the shareholders can do? Do you have somebody we can contact?

Reply: Every shareholder and creditor has the right to contact the Receiver to ask their own questions. She has an office number in Miami, and should be reachable through USXP.
Re: For General Comments and Questions from Today Forward. By Kevin on 9/11/2007 2:16 PM
Bud, I haven't bashed you, and I have asked many good questions and contributed much. I too am a Christian, Bud, and with all the pain so many usxp shareholders are in, I think it is a very bad thing you do to us when we ask you some questions you should easily be able to answer for us. In particular I am referring to your comments about one person owing basically the entire outstanding total of usxp shares. I think you should share this with all of us shareholders, because we are the ones who have supported Richard for years, and many of us are not bozos, we ask tough questions because those are the questions that have to be answered, and knowing that single shareholder, if it is true when all documentation to the public suggests it to be untrure, I think the decent thing to do is tell us who it is. You're not the only one who has been bashed by people Bud. Loyal shareholders of Richard's have been bashed for years, and some horrible things, so when you have a bone you put out there before us, this single shareholder, and then you go no further, provide any meat, and even pull the bone away, well it's just not very Christianlike. We need everyone pulling together, and when you toss out a bombshell like a single shareholder owning it all, it really causes concern when you won't provide any supportive evidence, as any reasonable shareholder trying to do due diligence would seek when someone in your position makes such a statement.

Thank you, and no hard feelings, but this is the time to be fully cooperative.

Kevin
Re: For General Comments and Questions from Today Forward. By bburrell on 9/11/2007 6:52 PM
I am literally buried by events right now, including the Canadian bombshell on their restarting unlimited naked shorting, since they know their brokers are honest.

Stunning statement about the purported honor of Canada's brokers, duplicitous almost beyond imagination.

The next question is what the NASD members will now ask for, the same I imagine. Look for a Dow of 6000 if we are lucky.

I am getting laundry lists of long interrogation posts, which I have neither the time nor the ability to answer, including some threatening to bash me, this after 7 years of pro bono slavery in service of this cause.

As for the gutless chicken shit bashers slandering me with screen names on boards of shame, I would love five minutes with them privately. They's only be conscious for the first 15 or so seconds, but I would insure the additional time wasn't wasted.

No one has taken me up on that so far, and this won't be any different. I wouldn't want the Karma of the dirt bags proliferating in this space. They jump for joy at the killing off of the jobs of 85 little guys, and the destruction of any potential return on assets of some 50,000 shareholders. God is tough on these types no matter what your belief systems.

This will all be sorted out for the most part by the end of November. This is about staying centered and being very, very patient. The SEC is a train wreck, one worse than most of the Companies they have destroyed with their pals.

They think their conduct is unaccountable. Don't bet on it. Most all sociopaths have disease problems that eat them alive from the inside, even while they think they are getting away with their amoral behavior.

Things will start to sort themselves out when it will be least expected.
Re: For General Comments and Questions from Today Forward. By Valueinvestor on 9/12/2007 6:08 AM
Thank you Bud for your last comment. Although my thanks arises principally from the fact that you addressed the situation with USXP in an indirect way, I want to assure you that your seven long years of pro bono service to the just cause can never go to waste. Indeed, I am sure you are aware that all noble servive is considered selfless for a good reason. When the self gets involved with such service it tarnishes its grandeur. Thus, as an admirer of your service and relentless fight against all that is untruthful allow me to urge you to remain selfless in your service. Best wishes in your continued journey and be sure to further develop that detachedness from all that is distracting and disdainful to your express purpose and destiny...
Re: For General Comments and Questions from Today Forward. By stryker-ny on 9/12/2007 6:10 AM
Bud...To your knowledge...can a lower court decision prevent a hearing in appellate court...tia

Reply: Not to the Best of my Knowledge. B.
Re: For General Comments and Questions from Today Forward. By Kevin on 9/12/2007 3:00 PM
Bud, I didn't think Universal ever got the appeal filed. Richard said they would appeal, but I didn't think they ever got the paperwork filed. So do we have an appeal in place or don't we?

If the appeal was filed, how come we can't find it on Pacer?

I saw appeals to judge Lynch to reconsider and consider other things, but I have not seen an appeal filed to the Apellate Court. Do we have something for certain before the Apellate Court and can you provide a case number?

The only bashing I see of you is on ragingbull but I rarely read anything posted there because it is fully controlled by those against Universal and has been controlled by them for years. I would pay them never mind.

I am still searching for the guy who killed himself, but keep coming up blank.

I assume you are still in recent contact with Universal as you said the former counsel, Mr. Gunderson I presume you are talking about, speaks highly of Ms. Moscowitz.

I think this rides on what she will do when she observes the stock has too many owners and not enough shares. Which is counterfeit, which isn't.

How come the U.S. justice department hasn't been involved in this more deeply?

Sincerely

Kevin

Reply: Good questions, which I can't answer except that Art Tifford was the one who was complimentary to Moscowitz. The appeal won't be done by the Company, but by Richard and Chris if it is done. Moscowitz will see no money for the appeal in the asset base of USXP as is, and I would doubt she will allow the appeal for the Company to go forward. Everyone will have to wait and see.
Re: For General Comments and Questions from Today Forward. By Dennis on 9/13/2007 10:49 AM
Good morning Bud,

I am the author of the USXP Petition in support of Richard Altomare et al in their battle against injustice. Richard has been kind several times in thanking me for beginning this petition and trying to gather signatures and attention. I have not heard from Richard since just before the Receiver took over.

Bud, if you have any contact with Richard, Mr. Gunderson, or Mr. Tifford, I would appreciate you letting them know that I still support them 100% and will stick with them till we have our victory in court and they are back running the company. I think they need to know they still have people loyal to them so if you could pass that word I would greatly appreciate it. And if you do contact them, I wish you would encourage them somehow to establish an email so the shareholders out here can contact them and express support because they must be going through some terrible times.

I believe we are positioned just where we need to be. That may sound strange, but the Courts have messed up so badly, and the SEC so involved in the illegal actions of naked short selling where in my opinion even though they are a government agency, they should be prosecuted under RICO, or something similar, because they should not be allowed to profit monetarily through these trades of counterfeit securities and get away with it, some kind of prosecution must take place.

I think Ms. Moscowtiz will be fair. Evaluate the business, and parts of this business are good businesses though quite small, Luggage Express and and Luggage Express Found are excellent businesses, and Madpackers a smaller but fair business.

I would like to see Universal go more on the offensive, I guess that means Richard and Chris personally now, and get on TV, although it may be embarrassing to some, I believe these two are thick skinned, and I think they should seek out CNBC, Dateline, Bloomberg's, and the like, and make USXP a national case.

They need to play this David verses Goliath case just as they said in their complaint years ago, and get it in front of the entire country.

I hope Mr. Tifford will handle the case going forward, and bill those two on a contingency, when they collect monies from the SEC and nss.

I think Universal, Richard et al, are the ones actually in the driver's seat on this. Things have to play out, and they are, it is a process, and it's not where you start, it's where you finish.

Dennis Marten 100% supporter of Richard Altomare USXP et al.

Thank you Bud.

Reply: I have forwarded this to appropriate parties.
Re: For General Comments and Questions from Today Forward. By Valueinvestor on 9/13/2007 10:51 AM
Bud: Going through some comments you made earlier this year w.r.t. USXP, I believe you too were quite confident that Altomare and Gunderson would file an appeal of Judge Lynch's ruling to the 2nd circuit. Yet this did not happen. Instead, Tifford tried the stay route and we ended up with a receiver. Although you no longer work for the ex-defense counsel, I am sure you have had a chance to speak to him recently (based on your observation that Tifford thought highly of Moscovitz). Thus, it is fair to assume that you know why the company did not file an appeal, yet you would rather not or cannot reveal thiis reason to us. Please correct me if I am wrong in this assumption. However, the quintessential question uppermost in most USXP shareholders' minds is in reference to your and Altomare's alluding to the "one or more overseas shareholder(s) that could be in possession of the entire legally issued float of USXP shares". I can understand it if you came to know this, like I and a few others did, simply from conversations with Altomare or Gunderson. However, you appear to be more sure than that and we wanted to explore that this confidence was based not merely from conversations with USXP officers but something more than that. You even alluded to Ms Moscovitz possibly uncovering this fact when she arrived at USXP HQs. Your refusal to go any further can only be interpreted that this information is pivotal to USXP's future battle to prove naked shorting and all efforts are being made not to divulge any particulars about this till the appropriate time. Is this a fair assessment, or is there another ? Thanks.

Reply: Your assessment is correct. This will sort itself out or not over the coming months.
Re: For General Comments and Questions from Today Forward. By anthony kalantzis on 9/13/2007 12:07 PM
if the evidence comes out ,that a single shsreholder owns more than the outstanding , should the shareholders prepare to go on the offensive with several lawsuits against the SEC or DTCC ?

the SEC should be very afraid of this one important fact

Replly: Expect nothing supportive from the SEC.
Re: For General Comments and Questions from Today Forward. By Jack on 9/13/2007 2:39 PM
Hi Bud. Do you have any idea why Tifford areed to the receivership and did not go into the Appeal to a higher court ????

It was done without a hearing or pleadings. As I understand things, Tifford wasn't notified till after the fact, an appeal point going forward. This Judge and the SEC wanted to block any appeal, and that was the principal issue.
Re: For General Comments and Questions from Today Forward. By shawn brandom on 9/13/2007 2:40 PM
hello i have been trying my level best to get this naked short selling scandal to main stream media. no one and i mean no one will touch it. i am regarded as a loon.
it only pisses me off more though.i have called many many so called attorneys,my senators, the sec, the secret service the fbi , homeland security, e-mailed every major and local news agency i can. this has been for several months now close to a year. i need help, i want to subpoena the sec use our laws to call them on the carpet.impose a daily fine of 5 billion dollars until the truth is told to the american people. i want to put the sec into a legal stranglehold where the only redemption is to tell the truth. then let them fall where they may , preferably in prison.
if you know of anyone that wants to help call me. 425-374-9710 or e-mail me
patrickpt10@hotmail.com
Re: For General Comments and Questions from Today Forward. By Martha on 9/13/2007 2:41 PM
Bud if a single shareholder owns more than 5 or 10 percent of the toal shares in a company they must file with the SEC. How is it then that a friend of the company reportedly owns more than this and has not filed it with the SEC? Such a situation would mean that this individual is in violation of the laws.
Re: For General Comments and Questions from Today Forward. By Kevin on 9/14/2007 1:58 PM
Would you please explain in detail the single shareholder who alledgedly owns all the shares. Shareholders are discussing this elsewhere and nobody has a clear understanding of it. Mr. Altomare has said he has 64,000 shareholders, but you have said he has one single shareholder who owns the share or most of them.

We are asking you for help. A clear statement settling this single shareholder comment once and for all. We are asking because we are concerned shareholders, not here to bash anyone, but to learn.

I forget the movie but, explain it to us like we are two year olds. We just need this one thing resolved to ease a lot of tensions and uncertainty.

Thank you

Kevin

Reply: Kevin, you don't understand the comment. I indicated one shareholder claims to have bought more shares than were outstanding 6 months ago. I never indicated he was the only shareholder, and if you have followed this stock, you know where this Non-US shareholder lives. That doesn't mean he got delivery of the certs on all of his purchases, nor does it mean the Company' other 50,000 plus shareholders don't own stock too. It is yet another indication of a Company having more longs than are in its legally outstanding, by their claim.

The only thing that will resolve this issue is for the Stock Transfer Register to be reconciled, preferably by the Receiver. There are professional third party services that do things like that who could do it for her and not be questioned for their objectivity. One such service is reported to have found similar problems with only the institutional holders of more than 100 major exchange companies.

Your understanding of this space is limited, and I have limited time. Keep your questions narrow and clearly defined, and I will respond when I can. I keep this Blog as a public service, so respect it.
Re: For General Comments and Questions from Today Forward. By Kevin on 9/14/2007 4:41 PM
Thank you Bud on the shareholder question. I do follow the stock in detail. What is confusing is there is often only partial answers and we have to mix that in with the bashers who then try to mislead. I appreciate you candor, we are on the same side.

Six months ago then the outstanding total was about 16 billion at least, I would have to double check but I know I am close. As for knowing who this non-U.S. shareholder is, Mr. Altomare has talked a lot about mideast people but he has never documented anything to shareholders or provided a name. Although I and other shareholders I am sure always wanted to believe, with a company like this with all this chaos going on around it, we prayed for a name but never got one.

I appreciate your help Bud. I really do. Now we just hope Moscowitz gives us a fair shake, and we hope Mr. Altomare will become more aggressive.

Thanks

Kevin

Reply: I agree with your hopes.
Re: For General Comments and Questions from Today Forward. By Martha on 9/14/2007 4:45 PM
Bud, I read your response to Kevin and I have to say I remain confused. If this shareholder had a portion of what they claim they would be required to file and yet there is none. How can we resolve this? The rumors and innuendo of such an individual is significant but the confusion over such an individual not being on record is equally confusing. Forgive my ignorance but I do not see where the complication exists in this scenario.

Reply: Martha, Non US parties are not required to comply with 13D, or filings as control persons. The offshore hedge funds committed numerous such rule breaches on both the long and short sides between 2000 and now.
Re: For General Comments and Questions from Today Forward. By stryker-ny on 9/16/2007 7:58 AM
Bud...Any news on USXP...the company hasn't commented on its position....

Reply: The receiver is running the Company. Nothing has been put out by the Company.

A timely appeal was filed on behalf of Altomare and Gunderson in 2nd Circuit.

This is all about time now.
Re: For General Comments and Questions from Today Forward. By anthony kalantzis on 9/16/2007 9:19 AM
Bud . Hypothetically speaking

if Moscowitz deregisters or steers USXP into bankruptcy , does the november case in the appellete court still proceed as scheduled ?

If USXP wins the 700 $ mill judgement how do the shareholders collect if the company is not listed ,and cannot benefit from a squeeze? by presentation of their certificates ?

Reply: The Appeal goes forward, but the Company won't be part of it, not unless the Receiver supports it, which can't be viewed as likely.

I doubt there will be any company to take in any collections, meaning they will be distributed to the owners of the action when and if it finally happens.
Re: For General Comments and Questions from Today Forward. By Valueinvestor on 9/16/2007 12:45 PM
Bud...a clarification please..you said "Non US parties are not required to comply with 13D,or filings as control persons". Someone pointed out that "Granted, it is difficult to find anything on the 13D, but it is very easy to find info on Form 4. Form 4 is required to be filed by anyone (no exclusions mentioned in any info about this form), who owns 10% or more of a company's stock (that includes individuals or organizations). Once that entity owns 10%, any trades (buys or sells) that affects that entity's holdings must be reported using a Form 4, at least until the entity's holdings falls below the 10% threshold." Is this is true ?



Reply: The structure used by large holders is to break up their holdings into many, many names, thereby circumventing Form 4 issues.

Again, proving offshore control interests is virtually impossible to get into Court.
Re: For General Comments and Questions from Today Forward. By Valueinvestor on 9/17/2007 9:03 AM
Bud: not to beat a dead horse, but this subject is still a bit unclear. You said earlier "As I understand things, Tifford wasn't notified till after the fact, an appeal point going forward. This Judge and the SEC wanted to block any appeal, and that was the principal issue." However, I believe in his final ruling and order (before appointing receiver) Judge Lynch referred repeatedly to an appeal that USXP had already filed (or is filing) that would perhaps address some of the issues raised by USXP, and thus a stay was not warranted. I would think he would not have mentioned that if he wanted to "block" the appeal. Could it be that Tifford could not file the appeal on behalf of USXP since an appeal bond would have to have been purchased first before making such an appeal and USXP did not have the funds to do the same ?

Reply: There was no hearing on the original appeal and request for stay. After the Judge ruled, there was an appeal to the 2nd Circuit. You are confusing actions before and after the ruling. The Judge never wanted an appeal, and had one simple way to block the Company's participation in such an action, the appt of a receiver. No bond was required for the filing of the appeal, as the Judge did not want any potential for an appeal.
Re: For General Comments and Questions from Today Forward. By Valueinvestor on 9/17/2007 9:13 AM
In the interest of keeping the issues separate, another one for your clarification please...you said "A timely appeal was filed on behalf of Altomare and Gunderson in 2nd Circuit." Also "The Appeal goes forward, but the Company won't be part of it, not unless the Receiver supports it, which can't be viewed as likely. I doubt there will be any company to take in any collections, meaning they will be distributed to the owners of the action when and if it finally happens." So the appeal in 2nd circuit is related to what Judge Lynch's court ruled upon w.r.t. Altomare and Gunderson only, on behalf of Altomare and Gunderson only, and this appeal has nothing to do with how it could affect the common shareholders ? In other words, while this appeal takes its own course, the receiver could very well shut the company down, file for Chapter 7 or 11, thereby making all the common shares worthless and leave the naked shorts unharmed ? In other words, Altomare has no plans whatsoever of coming to the aid of his shareholders, possibly because he is powerless and has no options left as an ex-CEO ? Those middle-eastern folks who owned the float at one time would also suffer the same fate as the commons here in the U.S., unless they have all cashed out ?



Reply: Again, you are missing the forest for the trees. The Receiver is now in charge of the Company, and she decides what will or will not be done for shareholders, not Richard. The Arabs have not cashed out to the best of my knowledge. Richard's and Chris' positions have been imposed on them by Lynch, and will remain their positions until or if an Appeal is accepted.
Re: For General Comments and Questions from Today Forward. By Valueinvestor on 9/17/2007 12:04 PM
Bud...on 8/03/07, in his OPINION AND ORDER, Judge Lynch noted the following "Plaintiff SEC and defendants Universal Express, Altomare, and Gunderson (“defendants”), have filed numerous motions in the wake of the Court’s February 21, 2007, grant of summary judgment to the SEC as to certain claims against these defendants. Pursuant to that determination, the Court entered a final judgment on the claims resolved by the summary judgment decision. Defendants have appealed the grant of summary judgment, and that appeal is pending." Further, he stated "Should defendants succeed in their appeal and the case be returned to this Court for trial, the SEC will presumably reassert the dismissed claims and the case will be restored to the trial calendar on all counts originally brought." As far as we can see, this appeal never got filed. Are you saying this appeal did not get filed because of the granting of receivership ? if so, why did Tifford have to wait this long (the original judgment was in Feb. 07) to file an appeal to the 2nd circuit on behalf of USXP ? Was he hoping that a request for a stay of the summary judgment and a jury trial would have made such an appeal to be unnecessary ? If he did, it appears he erred once again. As I understand it, there was no hearing on the original appeal because there was no appeal. There was only an application to appeal. Is this not correct ? You said "After the Judge ruled, there was an appeal to the 2nd Circuit." I presume you are talking about the appeal that Altomare & Gunderson just filed in the 2nd circuit, because there was no appeal that we know of on behalf of USXP after the judge ruled in Feb. 07 and before the judge's order for a receivership. Sorry, but this is confusing.



Reply: You need to speak to a lawyer to have this explained to you. There was an appeal of the right to jury trial, ignored, and more. The receiver was appointed without a hearing or pleadings being heard in court.

The appeal is on the actions pertaining to the appt of the Receiver, and more. Read it when it comes up on Pacer, probably in the next two weeks.
Re: For General Comments and Questions from Today Forward. By Valueinvestor on 9/17/2007 12:06 PM
You said "The Arabs have not cashed out to the best of my knowledge." Assuming they have indeed not cashed out, would it be fair to say that their fate is more or less the same as those of the ordinary shareholders here in the U.S. ? In other words, if we get wiped out, they get wiped out also ? I am asking because there may be some comfort in the fact that there are some heavy parties on the same side as the commons here in the U.S.

Reply: If there is a de-registration or bankruptcy (I expect one or the other), all shareholders are treated equally.
Re: For General Comments and Questions from Today Forward. By Valueinvestor on 9/17/2007 12:09 PM
Sorry Bud...I think I am begining to see what you are saying, but believe me if I am "missing the forest for the trees" so must a lot of USXP shareholders...I believe what you are saying is that an appeal was indeed filed before the judge's ruling (although all I could find was an application for an appeal)...but by appointing a receiver, the judge made sure the company was not part of the appeal...so now Altomare and Gunderson have to file an appeal on their behalf only sans the company...if this is correct, how is such an appeal going to help the shareholders, if and when it is heard and, let us say, a favorable ruling is obtained ? Can a favorable ruling in favor of Altomare and Gunderson cause Judge Lynch's ruling and order for fines of disgorgement and for receivership to be overturned ?

Reply: If there is a favorable ruling from the Appeals Court (many months away if process is typical), Judge Lynch's ruling or fines orders would be overturned, probably resulting in a new trial, by Jury this time.
Re: For General Comments and Questions from Today Forward. By Martha on 9/17/2007 3:26 PM
"The structure used by large holders is to break up their holdings into many, many names, thereby circumventing Form 4 issues."

Bud, why woulld a friend of the company try to circumvent Form 4 issues and thus risk the issues we see moving forward by the receiver? Would this shareholder not have a great deal to lose by not coming forward?

Reply: This is a very common structure for major offshore investors, multiple jurisdicitons, in multiple forms of holding structures, sometimes with multiple different beneficial interest holders. It depends on their countries' tax rules, and the advise they get from their lawyers, executors and trustees.

It is a form of diversification of sovereign risk, and is conservative financially.
Re: For General Comments and Questions from Today Forward. By Valueinvestor on 9/18/2007 8:23 AM
Relative to USXP, you said "If there is a de-registration or bankruptcy (I expect one or the other), all shareholders are treated equally." I understand bankruptcy, but what exactly is de-registration ? Is it a de-registration of the officers (Altomare & Gunderson) or the company ? What happens to common shares in a de-registration ?

Reply: In a de-registration (what was done to Eagletech), the shares are no longer registered for any trading. The equity remains, but the shorts don't have to cover.
The common shares and ownership are still there, but the Company is converted to a private entity.
Re: For General Comments and Questions from Today Forward. By anthony kalantzis on 9/18/2007 11:24 AM
Is it possible for a higher court to overturn an order of deregistration or BK , for example ,is there any chance EAGLETECH starts trading again ?

If a eagletech has excess LONG positions then becomes private due to deregistration ,how do shareholders know they own real shares ?

Reply: I see no reason for Eagletech to bankrupt. Neither will it start trading again in my estimation. Why would Rod Young want this crap again?

No one will ever know the real shares vs. the Counterfeit outstanding shares. That was the reason for the de-registration. All of the record over 6 years are now tossed, and Eagletech will be lucky to get to trial in 5 years, well after the statute of limitations has expired.
Re: For General Comments and Questions from Today Forward. By Valueinvestor on 9/18/2007 2:47 PM
Bud: excuse my ignorance please, but something does not make sense w.r.t. the potential existence of a single shareholder (or his representatives) that may be owning the entire legally issued outstanding float in USXP. If Universal Express (Altomare and others) and yourself only suspected this, but have no real proof, I can still understand this. But if either you or Altomare are fairly certain of this, then it does not make any sense at all why Altomare would not have requested these parties to come forward at this critical juncture and use this information as his ace of trumps to deflate the entire case put forward by the SEC. That Tifford also never used or considered that route can only be explained by the fact that this was just a hunch or theory and no one knew for sure. Neither I nor any of the other USXP shareholders can understand why Altomare did not use this weapon if indeed it ever existed, rather than go through possible incarceration for himself and put his loyal and long-time shareholders through such extreme pain and agony. If as you say the Arabs may be still holding on to their shares, it is not in the least bit clear why they would risk losing all of their investment rather than work with Altomare and trump the SEC with this ace in their sleeve. Are we missing something here ?


Reply: I answered this question two days ago on another post, and I can't afford to duplicate the answer. Remember, NON US holders don't have to comply with US laws if they split up their holdings sufficiently between names.
Re: For General Comments and Questions from Today Forward. By Valueinvestor on 9/18/2007 2:45 PM
Bud, you said in the event of a deregistration of a company by the SEC "No one will ever know the real shares vs. the Counterfeit outstanding shares". In this context, would those holding certificates for their shares be considered to be in possession of "real" shares. In other words, does the stock transfer agent have only enough certificates to give out as are equivalent to the legally issued shares in the company or can he issue more share certs than the legally issued amount ?


Reply: Counterfeit longs created by naked shorting are never known to the Company, are not registered, and therefore don't show up anywhere except where they are held, but not in the Company's Stock Transfer Register.
Re: For General Comments and Questions from Today Forward. By Valueinvestor on 9/18/2007 6:24 PM
Bud...Sorry, but perhaps I did not make the premise of my query as to why the Arabs did not just demand for their certificates and thereby help Altomare and the company by proving naked shorting once and for all clear. Two days ago and today I believe you responded by alluding to the fact that these large overseas holders can break up their holdings into many, many names, thereby circumventing Form 4 issues and that it is virtually impossible to prove offshore control interests. However, you may not be aware but Altomare has clearly stated in a webcast about a year ago that one day this off-shore party that is accmulating USXP shares will own the entire float and when they demand for their certificates that is when it would start to get really interesting. Thus, my question is not related to whether or not controlling ownership by foreign interests is provable in U.S. courts, but rather why these interests did not come to Altomare's rescue or alternately why Tifford did not consider making this fact known to the courts and use it as a strategy with which to deflate the SEC's case once and for all.


Reply: I don't know the answer to your question. Best, Bud.
Re: For General Comments and Questions from Today Forward. By Valueinvestor on 9/19/2007 10:27 AM
Bud...typically, when there is a filing in our court system, it is posted on PACER within a day or so...I am curious why the appeal filed by Altomare and Gunderson in the 2nd circuit court is taking so long to show up...would you happen to have the case number ? Also, if you get a chance to communicate with either Gunderson or Altomare, please convey to them that the shareholders are eager to hear from them in some form or another..perhaps, they can use a different venue to communicate with us...I don't see why they cannot communicate with us in a non-USXP venue...one possibility is the yahoo message board that I moderate (http://finance.groups.yahoo.com/group/usxp/messages)...they would have to register first... or they could use the site created by the coalition of luggage security http://www.luggagesecuritycoalition.com...


Reply: I will forward this to their counsel.
Re: For General Comments and Questions from Today Forward. By Valueinvestor on 9/19/2007 1:54 PM
Bud..tell me if I am bugging you and I will stop...its just that after a feverish pace of news, updates, webcasts, interviews, etc. on this company (USXP) for six long years, many of us, myself included, are stunned at this new development, and you happen to be the most educated and informed with whom to discuss and speculate as to what could be happening here. The bluster and chutzpah with which Richard was putting out press releases and giving video and radio interviews during this past year or so, the accelerated pace of advertisements in various venues (baseball, hockey, car racing, etc.), the hoopla of a possible bonanza for USXP from the Michael Jackson collection, all of this is totally inconsistent with how Altomare has been forced to fade into the sunset without even a whimper...totally subjugated by a powerful Judge, who of course, gave ample warning about his intentions with that blasphemous ruling in Feb. with language full of disdain for Richard and Gunderson. Another shock was when the SEC revealed Altomare had managed to sell 20 billion more shares after the Feb. ruling, in apparent defiance of the judge's ruling, which begs the question - where did all the money raised from selling 20 billion shares in the months from Feb. to June 07 go ? Clearly, some went for the advertisements and race car sponsors. But a quick calculation suggests the funds raised (even if by selling stock rights) would have been in excess of 20 million $, far above what was spent on advertising, etc. The missing funds are a mystery. Some say, Richard has been quietly funneling these funds to a Saudi/middle eastern or overseas company, the survivor of the U.S. one. As the appeal takes its own sweet time playing out in the 2nd circuit, is it possible for Altomare and his ME friends to orchestrate a rebirth of Universal Express in some foreign land, one that perhaps provides a role for the current bonafide shareholders of USXP ? Bud, you have followed this for some time. You have said this company has been naked shorted to oblivion. Besides waiting like conquered sheep for the Receiver and Judge Lynch to determine the fate of USXP and its shareholders, is there nothing else that those who are willing to fight can do ? In my opinion, if USXP is naked shorted, and if USXP has no immediate hope (we are tired of the future "pies-in-the-sky" options), then any fight by anybody, including the Eagletechs and the Overstocks, can be written off as futile, puerile and a sheer waste of energy. Tell us what you REALLY think, Bud...vis-a-vis USXP...thanks again for your probono advice and counsel...

Reply: OSTK and Eagletech are different cases, with different predicate acts.

I do need you to ask one clear question at a time, per day. You are squeezing out other questions.

All everyone can do now is wait and see what happens.
Re: For General Comments and Questions from Today Forward. By Dennis on 9/19/2007 1:56 PM
Hello Bud,

Just want to let you know, if Richard Altomare needs a place to communicate to his shareholders he may utilize the USXP Petition. Just have him sign the Petition, and he can write some remarks to the side, and I will make sure it gets spread over the internet. Richard may post as many times as he likes. Or, if he prefers, he may email me dennismarten@yahoo.com and again I will make sure it goes all over the internet. I know these may not be great offers, but it is the best I can do.

I would also suggest, Richard contact Don at MoneyTV, and ask about going on with no charge to USXP. Don, has received much money from USXP over the years, and surely at this crucial time he would allow Richard some free airtime.

I also suggest, Richard may start his own blog, and let me know, and again I will forward to all I can reach.

Just offering what I can.

Dennis Marten
Re: For General Comments and Questions from Today Forward. By Bud on 9/19/2007 7:39 PM
I see another GLKCE in the making. I am a shareholder in a company called Cal-Bay Holdings CBAY. I personally own about 20mill shares, the CEO put out an 8k stating their are 41m.ill shares outstanding and he filed a form 4 showing that he owned cum. 37 mill and an additional 100mill. The stck has had trading days of 500 mill on some days how could this be. Could this guys be more flagrant in front of the face of the SEC. Something has got to give here. I just don't see an end in sight. Do you have any opinions on this? And trust me this is not the only one that has goings on like this. By the way OSTK @ $27+ today huh. Way to go Patrick.

Reply: I don't know the stock in question. The pattern is familiar though.

Believe me, the SEC and the NASD already know about this. Check the outstanding short interest.

Just because they know about it doesn't mean they will do anything.

There are 1000's of such cases over the past 10 years.
Re: For General Comments and Questions from Today Forward. By Dennis on 9/20/2007 10:07 AM
Bud, I was reading what Bud wrote in about CalBay Holdings. I know nothing about them, but from what he wrote, most or all shares being accounted for by the ceo yet hundreds of millions trading some days, this seems to be what goes on in all these naked short cases and companies either go out of business, or in the case of usxp, get clobbered by the SEC if they dare fight back.

It almost appears no legal recourse. I see you said Eagletech may never get their suit resolved because statute of limitations may run out, even though they finally got the documents they needed. And usxp the Receiver you say could shut them down, withdraw appeal, close shop.

So it seems Due Process is an obstructed road for companies naked shorted.

This seems un-American. How come despite all the efforts of some in Congress, some media but not much, and some individuals, the point can not get made to the American public and media at large, that this is out and out stealing in the billions of dollars and it's for all intents and purposes, legalized stealing endorsed by the SEC, and how come this point can't sinnk in to people so something gets done?

Where is Eliott Spitzer type when you truly need them?

Dennis

Reply: Elliot Spitzer opted out of this to become Governor, his self interest taking precedence over anything else. Eagletech won't get criminal charges filed, but its civil action will proceed.
Re: For General Comments and Questions from Today Forward. By Dennis on 9/20/2007 10:10 AM
Bud, I see Overstock has some big news today, there proceeds to court as the California Supreme Court ruled against the defendants. I like the path Overstock has taken, to go after firms other than the SEC. It's too bad Universal Express never tried this, and I cannot understand why they never did. I do know they replied that it would be too much trouble to go after brokerages, too difficult is what they told me a couple of times. But I see Overstock doesn't find it difficult going after parties other than the SEC.

Overstock stock price has gone from about $18.50 if I recall, to almost $27.00 since the Grandfather Clause was revoked, and of course on this continuing good news that they will see a courtroom and jury. Universal could have had the same thing happen, but didn't. It just seems the legal team at Universal hasn't been on the ball in knowing who all to attack, and focusing just on the SEC was possibly a huge mistake.

I know you have said there are other potential lawsuits to come from Universal, but it still appears they really screwed up.

I see Overstock winning huge, and I see the stock price going straight up still. Not sure when the court date will be, and even with postponements it eventually will happen, and Overstock will have their victory. I think ostk will likely be $40-$50 by year's end. Looks like they have a legitimate naked short position, and the naked shorts are covering some. Makes you wonder why the effect on usxp has been 100% the opposite.

I'm long usxp, for a long time, but clearly they have screwed up and not had the best of legal representation.

Dennis
Re: For General Comments and Questions from Today Forward. By Mulder on 9/20/2007 10:18 AM
Dear Bud:

A question on USXP's NSS position. Prior to the alledged revelation
that one individual (through several controlled entities) acquired a
controlling interest in USXP, how did the company or you determine
that USXP was NSS. As the DTCC and other reports were/are not
available to the company, what did they/you use to determine that the
company's long position exceeded the float? Was it trading patterns?


Reply: They presented trading records to the SEC showing something like 54 Million shares trading on 3 Million outstanding in 20 trading days, and the SEC told them to work it out with the market makers.

They chose to sue instead in Dade County Court, winning two judgements totalling $588 Million. The SEC went ballistic after the second judgment and that is when the Company's problems began.
Re: For General Comments and Questions from Today Forward. By Kevin on 9/20/2007 10:21 AM
Kevin,

One question per post please. I simply don't have the time right now to answer laundry lists of questions.

Bud.
Re: For General Comments and Questions from Today Forward. By Kevin on 9/20/2007 12:30 PM
Bud, you often say the bashers don't dare face you. Well I don't bash you, but I see you running away from tough questions. You dangle things before usxp shareholders, but then you don't have the decency to account when you are asked to state something clearly. Then you go and blame everyone but yourself. Like you said, it's your blog, but just so you know, since you bring up the Christian things and invoke God, you need to take a good look at yourself and stop being such a jerk. Stop boasting about yourself. If you have read the Bible, you would know not to boast. So much of what you say seems to be very non-Christian.

I know you won't allow this to post, and I won't bother you anymore, and people shouldn't have to kiss your ass just to get a straight answer from you. You are just another person who is seeking the glory for himself, rather than helping and being a real Christian.

If you were a real Christain, you would apologize and acknowledge you have been that jerk.

Kev

Reply: Kevin, Chill Out. I am telling everyone the same thing. I am literally buried with life right now. I told you what to do, ask one question at a time, and I will try to answer them each day. If that doesn't satisfy you, log out.
Re: For General Comments and Questions from Today Forward. By stryker-ny on 9/20/2007 2:23 PM
Bud...Thanks for all that you do here..I really..really...appreciate the sharing of information....

Reply: The kind words are appreciated. See my next post.
Re: For General Comments and Questions from Today Forward. By V.Ferrier on 9/20/2007 2:26 PM
Bud, are there still any chances that USXP will recover, as well as its shareprice, and shareholders can avoid a total loss, or are you certain this game is over? If yes, what could the scenarios be that will put USXP back on track.

Reply: I am 90-10 against any return to shareholders, and I hope the Receiver will prove me wrong. I know how it could be turned around, but the Receiver has every reason not to allow that.
Re: For General Comments and Questions from Today Forward. By Valueinvestor on 9/21/2007 8:45 AM
Bud...relative to how USXP can be turned around you said "I know how it could be turned around, but the Receiver has every reason not to allow that." Perhaps you could tell us how and we could attempt to force the receiver to allow that ?

Reply: I don't believe the Receiver can be forced to do anything, except by the Court that appointed her. That Judge's position is very clearly opposed to USXP continuing. Only a successful appeal gives anyone a chance, and I don't think that will happen in time to save anything.
Re: For General Comments and Questions from Today Forward. By stryker-ny on 9/21/2007 8:47 AM
cant pull up the latest posts ?????

The web master had a problem with available storage, which has been resolved.

Let me know if you are still having a problem/.
Re: For General Comments and Questions from Today Forward. By mulder on 9/21/2007 8:53 AM
Bud, if as you suggest, the Stock Tranfer Register needs to be
properly reconciled by an independent third party in order to prove
naked shorting in USXP post the two Dade county judgments, and this
has not happened in the recent past, then why did'nt Altomare and
Tifford do this while Richard was still in office ? Would'nt that
have been a critical part of their case ? Why suggest this now ?



Reply: This has been done regularly, in connection with financial statements for reporting. Only a third party reconciliation will be trusted by either side now.
Re: For General Comments and Questions from Today Forward. By Valueinvestor on 9/21/2007 1:31 PM
Bud...Oct. 15 the revoked GF clause deadline kicks in possibly leading to some short covering in companies heavily naked shorted (but not by options MMs)...if USXP is only deregistered by Oct. 15, since its shares can still be traded for another 90 days, could this deadline potentially have an effect on the USXP share price ? Since the shares are still trading freely, how may the Oct. 15 deadline affect its price relative to potential covering by naked shorts ?


Reply: This is a good question with no clear answer. USXP has never been on the Reg SHO list. I doubt they will call the market makers to task if it will hurt them, rather, they will just flip the positions into ex-clearing.
Re: For General Comments and Questions from Today Forward. By Kevin on 9/22/2007 1:33 PM
Bud, you said relative to usxp, it could be turned around. Exactly how?

Reply: Strategic outside investment, combined with narrowed focus. The Luggage Express concept is a no-brainer technically, and with 3 Million bags lost last year, there would be incredible demand.
Re: For General Comments and Questions from Today Forward. By Kevin on 9/22/2007 4:24 PM
Bud, Moscowitz can shut the company down for any reason, withdraw the appeal for any reason. If someone like Mr. Tifford were to approach her and say he would handle the appeal pro bono so shareholders don't get shafted, it seems Moscowitz would have no excuse for allowing the appeal to continue.

Do you think Mr. Tifford should do so?

Reply: I haven't seen everything, but I doubt Tifford would agree to what you are considering. Why should a Receiver be paid, and not him?

There is also the equation of what Jane would want to do, and I have no idea what is motivating her.

Next week will be a tough one for everyone who owns stock. I think Lynch will be looking for a pound of flesh, no matter what, and prior jury decisions be damned.
Re: For General Comments and Questions from Today Forward. By Valueinvestor on 9/23/2007 8:53 AM
Bud...two questions if I may...
First, you said "Next week will be a tough one for everyone who owns stock. I think Lynch will be looking for a pound of flesh, no matter what, and prior jury decisions be damned." Care to elaborate ? A pound of fleash ? Are you inisnuating that Judge Lynch is out to seek revenge with USXP or its shareholders ? if so, who harmed him ? He may be partial to the SEC's case, but I fail to see the significance of this Shylockian phrase...

Second, even if the company is deregistered, can it continue to trade on the pinks ? There are many good European companies trading on the pinks here in the U.S.

Reply: The SEC wants Blood from Altomare and Gunderson. The shareholders are the last thing on their minds. Let them prove me wrong, and I will admit my error.

As for Euro companies trading here, there is one difference, which is that their markets enfore 3 day settlement at their clearance level, a long way from the BS here.
Re: For General Comments and Questions from Today Forward. By VFerrier on 9/27/2007 10:53 AM
Hi Bud,

Do you have any idea by when we can expect a first interim report from the USXP receiver Moscowitz?

Additionally may I ask your thoughts about following post found on Raging Bull a while back:

>Altofraud met with the whole staff today. Told them his vision is to
> either A. Have the receiver either pull herself out as the company is
> good and so is his leadership, and receivership is wrong, and tell
> Judge Lynch that. B. HAve Gundy file and appeal and win and have her
> removed. C. Be removed himself, and then wait until the receiver puts
> it up for sale and then buy it back through a shell company with all
> of the bills and outstanding balances dismissed. Thinks receivership
> could be a blessing in disguise.

Thanks a lot!


Reply: I have no idea what she will do or when.
Re: For General Comments and Questions from Today Forward. By Ralph on 9/27/2007 1:01 PM
Mr. Burrell are you aware that Luggage Express has been sold to a company named Sports Express in Durango Colorado? LE is part, rather was part of Universal Express. It appears the receiver is liquidating the company?

This certainly indicates to me that Mr. Altomare may indeed have been a fraud, otherwise I cannot see this receiver taking such a drastic step. Monies made I assume to pay the fines, pay the receiver.

Mr. Burrell, are you aware of this? Is Mr. Tifford? Is this enough proof that usxp is now defunct and Mr. Altomare likely to go to prison for fraud?

Eager for your reply.

Ralph

Reply: I don't know, but I will try to find out. Bud.
Re: For General Comments and Questions from Today Forward. By Sean on 9/29/2007 12:52 PM