Seeking Alpha

The GeoTeam's  Instablog

The GeoTeam
Send Message
At GEO, our focus is on providing high quality insights on mid and micro cap equities, both in the China and U.S. spaces. Since our inception, we have come to be known by our GeoBargain selections, a group of stocks with a specific set of criteria that has proven to help them perform better than... More
My company:
GeoInvesting, LLC
My blog:
GeoInvesting Blog
  • True Owner And Legal Representative Of The Ping Yi Mine Speaks Out To Expose L&L Energy Fraud 25 comments
    Feb 16, 2012 11:52 AM | about stocks: LLEN

    True Owner and Legal Representative of the Ping Yi Mine Speaks Out to Expose L&L Fraud

    Since our initial report on January 17, 2012, the GeoTeam has continued to develop even more conclusive proof to support its case that L & L Energy never purchased the Ping Yi Mine on November 1st, 2009, which they claim represented 37% or their production capacity in 2010. After the Chinese New Year holiday, we contacted Mr. Hu Shiwei and Mr. Zhang Baoguo, the Ping Yi Mine owners, who control a combined 70% of its equity. They were enraged by the fraudulent activities of LLEN and said that they never transferred their interests of Ping Yi Mine to LLEN and/or its affiliated identities. The true owners of Ping Yi Mine provided the following:

    • A video made by Mr. Hu Shiwei, The executive partner and legal representative of the Ping Yi Mine, in the office of the Notary Public showing the original business license and mining permit of Ping Yi Mine. In this video he also explained, with a written statement, the true ownership structure of Ping Yi Mine and other relevant matters. The gravity of the matter really hit home when he stated:
      • LLEN's claimed USD 3.9 million transaction to purchase the Ping Yi Mine never occurred. Mr. Hu Shiwei referred to this phantom transaction as a total scandal.
      • He and his partners reserve the right to sue LLEN regarding the infringement of their interests.
      • They strongly condemn the fraudulent activity of LLEN.
    • NOTARIZED copies of the original identity card of Mr. Hu Shiwei, the Ping Yi Mine business license and the Ping Yi Mine mining permit which exactly match the current SAIC file on record.
    • A notarized letter executed by Ping Yi Mine Legal Representative and Executive Partner Hu Shiwei stating that LLEN does not and never did own the Ping Yi Mine.

    The True Owners Of Ping Yi Mine Speak Out And State That LLEN Never Acquired Ping Yi Mine.

    Upon our request, on Feb. 12, 2012, Mr. Hu Shiwei visited the Fuyuan County Notary Office, Yunan Province, which is the closest notary office to his home address, No. 17, Qingxi Road, Fuyuan County, Qujing City, Yunan province (see the ID Card of Mr. Hu Shiwei below).

    Identification Card of Hu Shiwei

    As the legal representative and executive partner of the Ping Yi Mine, Mr. Hu Shiwei possesses all of the standard documents of the Ping Yi Mine. He provided a notary public clerk with the original business license, mining permit and his own identity card. The clerk made copies of these documents and notarized that these copies are the same as the original documents as seen below.

    Furthermore, before the notary public, Mr. Hu Shiwei also executed a written statement (Declaration) which translates exactly as follows:

    We, Pan County Pingguan Ping Yi Mine, with registered address Yiche village, Pingguan town, Pan County, Liupanshui City, Guizhou Province,are a legal partnership. Our registered capital is RMB fifty million and the registered partners are Zhang Baoguo (40%), Hu Shiwei (30%), Liu Shuangyou (16%) and Chen Honglin (14%). Hu Shiwei is the legal representative and executive partner of Pan County Pingguan Ping Yi Mine.

    L&L Energy Inc., Fuyuan County Baoxing Economic & Trade Co., Ltd. and/or their related identities and/or persons did not acquire any of our interests, are not and did not become our shareholders, investors and/or partners.

    Also provided is a notarized document that states the Notary witnessed the executed, enclosed and chopped declaration as seen below.

    To further dispel LLEN management's multi-year hoax, Mr. Hu Shiwei also made a short video where he showed the original business license and mining permit of Ping Yi Mine and explained with a written statement the ownership structure of Ping Yi Mine and other relevant matters.

    On February 7, 2012, we also obtained another copy of Ping Yi Mine's SAIC file. Based on the SAIC file, the 2011 annual inspection date mentioned in the SAIC file is June 14, 2011, which is the same as the annual inspection date on the business license disclosed by Mr. Hu Shiwei and notarized by the notary public. All other information in the SAIC file is also the same as the information shown on the NOTARIZED business license and/or in the written statement.

    LLEN's Absurd Defense

    In our initial report issued on January 17, 2012, we disclosed that the Ping Yi Mine was listed for sale on multiple web sites in China (and still is as of today). We also showed that the Ping Yi Mine SAIC file we obtained on January 13, 2012 revealed that L&L is not the true owner of Ping Yi mine.

    LLEN's response to our report should make even the most blindly bullish investors' hearts skip a beat. They:

    • didn't marshal their lawyers and auditors who asserted that the mine's ownership couldn't be in doubt.
    • didn't offer any evidence proving that the sales postings were a hoax.
    • didn't offer any documents rebutting the GeoTeam's findings.

    Instead, LLEN issued a brief press release on Jan 17, 2012 claiming that our conclusions were wrong and stating that the Ping Yi Mine was indeed owned by them. In defense of management's integrity and its investors' capital, this is the sum total of what LLEN had to say for itself:

    "L&L had not posted Ping Yi for sale and that the company never authorized or prepared such sale notices. Accordingly, the Company does not know the source of such notices."

    LLEN, to be clear, is resorting to grade school word games.

    LLEN is asking its investors, auditors and regulators to accept that one of its key operating assets was wrongfully put up for sale and that it took no action to stop it or even attempt to figure out who was doing this to them. The GeoTeam is fairly confident that if someone tried to put Berkshire Hathaway's Geico unit up for sale, or Goldman Sachs' trading operations, they might at least try to get to the bottom of it, if only for appearance's sake. To that end, the statement from Ed Moy, L&L Board Director and Vice President, is surely one for the record books:

    "Last April, I led investors on a tour of our operations in Yunnan and Guizhou Provinces of China, which included a visit to Ping Yi Mine. Investors had a chance to meet and talk with our staff and local mine management. I can therefore confirm our ownership of Ping Yi Mine."

    In other words, Ed Moy only confirms that the mine exists (a fact we have never disputed) taking this to mean that LLEN owns the property.

    Well, we have performed the simple steps that Ed and institutional investors should have taken to verify who really owns the mine. We will let investors decide who has provided the most compelling evidence:

    1. Ed's tour?
    2. LLEN's completely unacceptable press release? or
    3. Our government documents, transcripts, recorded conversations, notarized statements from the true owners of the Ping Yi mine and a video by the legal representative and executive partner of the Ping Yi Mine.

    CONCLUSION

    Our view is simplicity itself: LLEN has been making up wide swaths of its public filings for several years in a profoundly audacious bid to mislead investors, its auditors, NASDAQ and the SEC. They have been discovered and called out; all that remains is the day of reckoning for their Ping Yi Mine hoax. To date, many China Hybrids and their management teams have escaped criminal liability because they were entirely based in China. LLEN is different since it is a U.S. domiciled company with active headquarters on these shores and management directly subject to U.S. legal enforcement. Investors should be aware of the recent developments regarding the FBI's involvement in the Chinese RTO market.

    Disclosure: I am short LLEN.

    Themes: L L Energy, Ping Yi Mine Stocks: LLEN
Back To The GeoTeam's Instablog HomePage »

Instablogs are blogs which are instantly set up and networked within the Seeking Alpha community. Instablog posts are not selected, edited or screened by Seeking Alpha editors, in contrast to contributors' articles.

Comments (25)
Track new comments
  • Parker2
    , contributor
    Comments (67) | Send Message
     
    I have a notarized statement from someone saying that he has the Brooklyn Bridge to sell me. Is it true?

     

    A notary does NOT verify facts, just idenity of signature.
    16 Feb 2012, 12:05 PM Reply Like
  • Parker2
    , contributor
    Comments (67) | Send Message
     
    An individual reading from a script and putting something in writing shows that he is acting upon direction and command of someone else. He has no incentive otherwise to do so.

     

    By the way, please refer to my question (four times asked) about actual site visit.

     

    No site visit to Ping-Yi; no credibilty.
    16 Feb 2012, 12:31 PM Reply Like
  • packersowner1
    , contributor
    Comments (15) | Send Message
     
    Someone provided a preview of this story on Yahoo Finance message board yesterday with a link to the "Chinese government office" so we could see the SAIC filings.

     

    Small problem though after I checked the ISP. Here are the two checks that I did.

     

    http://bit.ly/AnCLB4

     

    Using that I found ISP to be: 96.0.104.36

     

    Then verified location from this website:

     

    http://bit.ly/wCUm2T

     

    Hmmm....."Chinese government office" uses an ecommerce company in Columbus, OH to host its website?

     

    How many of you actually believe that a Chinese government office would use an ecommerce company in the US let alone in Ohio.

     

    I am sure that is why today they did not provide any links. They were already found out to be a fake yesterday and only show pretty pictures.

     

    I have reported you to the SEC today as well.

     

    Oh and here are the links to the yahoo poster who should be tracked down but strangely the person's firt post was yesterday....imagine that.....did not want anyone to know who he was:
    http://bit.ly/AfpCOm

     

    How long with this one last on SA before this gets pulled.
    16 Feb 2012, 07:57 PM Reply Like
  • The GeoTeam
    , contributor
    Comments (371) | Send Message
     
    Author’s reply » Packer.. I have a great idea. Why don't you provide a government link to where you believe the correct SAIC file resides.. You will have to do this on your own since the company will not reveal their version of the SAIC filings. Let's go.. Show us the correct evidence..

     

    All you and your ignorant online friends do is criticize without offering your own proof.
    19 Feb 2012, 04:29 PM Reply Like
  • maxlogan
    , contributor
    Comments (24) | Send Message
     
    Hmmm.. let's see here:

     

    - A guy reading from a piece of paper.
    - LLEN doesn't know who that guy is nor ever seen him before
    - Guy has no reason to read from this piece of paper unless under coersion or direction of geo-investing.
    17 Feb 2012, 05:33 PM Reply Like
  • CoolWatch
    , contributor
    Comments (146) | Send Message
     
    A more conclusive proof this time? Or should we expect the "UTMOST" conclusive one later when this one is found inconclusive or even misleading like before?
    18 Feb 2012, 09:20 AM Reply Like
  • CoolWatch
    , contributor
    Comments (146) | Send Message
     
    DO NOT LET GEO FOOL YOU LONGS & SHORTS AGAIN.

     

    I will let you guys know what and why GEO's latest hit-piece is a foul play.

     

    Stay tune.
    18 Feb 2012, 10:37 AM Reply Like
  • The GeoTeam
    , contributor
    Comments (371) | Send Message
     
    Author’s reply » Mr. Cool.. You need to stay tuned..
    19 Feb 2012, 04:23 PM Reply Like
  • CoolWatch
    , contributor
    Comments (146) | Send Message
     
    When did you request Mr. Hu Shiwei to visit the Fuyuan County Notary Office, Yunan Province on Feb. 12, 2012?

     

    One day, two days or before February 12, 2012? Or on February 7, 2012 the same day you obtained the SAIC file?
    20 Feb 2012, 09:58 AM Reply Like
  • CoolWatch
    , contributor
    Comments (146) | Send Message
     
    Looks like the GEO has the habit not to keep any records....to avoid challenges? Or things it claim it does just never happen nor exist?
    20 Feb 2012, 08:58 PM Reply Like
  • CoolWatch
    , contributor
    Comments (146) | Send Message
     
    The truth is drawing near.... GEO's creditbility is on verge of bankruptcy....

     

    We are about to find out.
    21 Feb 2012, 01:32 AM Reply Like
  • Parker2
    , contributor
    Comments (67) | Send Message
     
    T-square shows that Ping Yi is being operated by LLEN.

     

    I guess that's why they never answered my question (posted over 4 times!) of why they didn't go on-site.

     

    the truth can be inconvenient for Geo.
    21 Feb 2012, 08:38 AM Reply Like
  • CoolWatch
    , contributor
    Comments (146) | Send Message
     
    LLEN: Is GEO Scammed Or Part of the Scam?

     

    GEOInvesting (“GEO”) has in one month released five OTGDD reports (Jan 13, 17, 19 & 20, 2012 and February 16, 2012) questioning LLEN’s ownership in Ping Yi mine and followed by alert criticizing the Company’s press release on February 17, 2012.

     

    If you recall, I did some due diligence on GEO’s above OTGDD and had my comments posted on its Instablog with Seekingalpha on January 23, 2012 (http://seekingalpha.co...), not to defend for LLEN but to let readers have another perspective and disclose the alleged motive behind this research house. This time is no difference. What’s more is to let readers to know even better how unacceptable the quality & standards of GEO research team is when performing OTGDD.

     

    True Representation of Majority Owners as Presented by GEO?
    Why GEO stresses that they contacted both Mr. Hu Shiwei and Mr. Zhang Baoguo, who collectively control 70% of the Ping Yi Mine?

     

    Not only GEO said that both Hu & Zhang "are enraged by the fraudulent activities of LLEN and that they never transferred their interests of Ping Yi Mine to LLEN and/or its affiliated identities," but it also mentioned both of them have provided the firm the notarization documents and video. Any yet there is no sight of Zhang in the video or him signing any kind documents (for notarization) that GEO claimed he has expressed.

     

    That fact that GEO fails to get Zhang to go to the notary public office together with Hu leads us to believe the reliability of the GEO report is of question and I have strong reservation and doubts that Hu represents Zhang's view as attempted and presented by GEO.

     

    Furthermore, even though we can hardly understand why GEO OTGDD team did not accompany Hu to the notary office, we thought GEO would make reasonable efforts to verify the materials (i.e. the notarization documents and video) provided by Hu to ensure the least DD work is in place. However, I can tell GEO for some unknown reasons (as disclosed below) has chosen not to do anything.

     

    Up to now, the only viable theory (or answer if you like) I can think of is GEO knew all along the whole thing was a scam, so instead of poking around for truth, it tactfully chose to let readers know the only thing it did was the contact with Hu & Zhang while playing NO part in the visit to notary office, the notarization and video taking.

     

    Why GEO allegedly makes such appearance and false representation to mislead readers and viewers? It is suspected that GEO intends to create a picture that Mr. Hu (the single largest owner of the mine) consents to and represents the opinion and conclusion of majority owner of the mine so that it can go on with the unfound accusation of LLEN fraud and further substantiate such claim through notarization.

     

    Reliable Video without Verification?

     

    GEO's report states that the video and notarization documents were provided by the true owners of Ping Yi Mine. Seems to me that GEO is attempting to tell us these gentlemen are the reliable source of verification. Yet I do have the following queries.

     

    It is difficult to understand why in the video Mr. Hu,
    - never mentions the place and date of the Video taken.
    - never other than the legal representative, mentions that he is authorized to represent Zhang and or any other partners of Ping Yi mine to declare what is stated in the declaration.
    - never shows us how he enters into the Fuyuan County Notary Office from outside all the way to the room where he made his presentation.
    - never shows us the notarization documents but only copies of business license and mining permit of Ping Yi mine.
    - invites viewers to have direct contact but never leaves his direct contact details, such as phone number as the sales agent Mr. Wu did. Didn’t he said he wanted to sell?

     

    I think the video would have been much more reliable and less questionable if Mr. Hu also,
    - shows us to the Ping Yi mine and the office to demonstrate he is in control or part of the management there.
    - has other partners of Ping Yi mine appeared in the video to show support of his declaration and condemnation.

     

    Even more interesting, I do not see any proof from GEO confirming Zhang has any knowledge of the video and notarization documents. And so far I still do not know why the Ping Yi owners have not instituted any legal proceedings against LLEN to protect their interest. Maybe GEO can share its insight with us.

     

    Notarization a Necessary Tool for GEO to Establish LLEN being a Fraud?
    Yes, why not?

     

    In China notarization is more than having an attorney or certified accountant to witness a signature. You must provide sound and solid proof to a notary office in order to process and complete a notarization. Notarization must also be in conformity to certain Articles of the Notarization Law of the People's Republic of China (http://bit.ly/xI0ZBc).

     

    Notary office is a subordinate agency of the Ministry of Justice of the People's Republic of China. A Notary Public may, according to Chinese legal system, prepare, attest, authenticate and certify deeds and other documents, under the signature and official seal of the Notary. Examples of services are certification of Birth Certificates, identification cards, Household Registration documents, Driver's License, Police Records, Health Records, Property title, power of attorney, guarantor documents, authorization documents, declaration documents, lottery tickets certification and business licenses.

     

    Are the Notarization Documents by the Fuyuan County Notary Office in Yunan Province the Valid Proof?

     

    Inconsistency Found
    There is no Article 55 of the General Principles of the Civil Law referred and written in the Chinese notarization document “(2012) YungFuyuangZhengzi No.51” in relation to Business License, Mining Permit & ID Card but only in English translation. How come GEO never notices such discrepancy?

     

    What is Article 55 of the General Principles of the Civil Law of the PRC? (http://bit.ly/zwQ3GO)

     

    Article 55: A civil juristic act shall meet the following requirements:
    (1) the actor has relevant capacity for civil conduct;
    (2) the intention expressed is genuine; and
    (3) the act does not violate the law or the public interest.

     

    Can we regard the Chinese notarization version WITHOUT interpreting the Article 55? What would be the implication to the legal capacity of Hu, the validity of Business License, Mining Permit & ID?

     

    Are the Notarization Documents Genuine at All?
    As clearly stated by GEO, upon its request, on Feb. 12, 2012, Mr. Hu visited the Fuyuan County Notary Office, Yunan Province. Subsequently, all the notarization documents were issued dated February 12, 2012.

     

    While it may be true that many of us work on Sundays, it is almost 100% sure that notary offices including those in China DO NOT open to serve the public on Sundays. Check your calendar to see if February 12, 2012 falls on Sunday. I mean why a notary office would open on Sunday to notarize for Hu alone or to issue notarization documents on Sunday?

     

    I have checked the regular office hours of different notary offices across China as below for your immediate reference:

     

    ShenZhen Notary Office are from Monday to Friday (08:00-12:00 & 14:00 - 17:30).
    Shanghai Putong Notary Office are from Monday to Thursday (08:30-12:00 & 13:00-17:00), Friday (08:30-12:00 & 13:00-15:30).
    SuZhou Notary Office are from Monday to Friday (09:00-11:30 & 13:00 - 17:00).
    HuNan ChangSha YuHua Notary Office are from Monday to Friday (09:00-11:50) & Monday to Thursday (Summer time 13:30-16:30, Winter 13:00-17:00)
    ZhuHai Notary Office are from Monday to Friday (09:00-17:30)
    BeiJing FangYuan Notary Office are from Monday to Saturday (09:00-11:30, 13:30-16:30)

     

    As far as what I have got, none of the notary offices open on Sundays and most not open on Saturdays either.

     

    In order to ensure that the Fuyuan County Notary Office is like other offices not open on Sundays, I have performed a due diligence by calling their office on February 19 (Sunday). Certainly, nobody answered my phone on February 19 morning or afternoon. Still, this is not enough evidence to proof anything. So I decided to call again on February 20 (Monday), 2012.

     

    It was about 11:22 am in China when my call got through. Following is the transcript after a lady with local accent picked up my phone (of course we talked in Chinese):

     

    COO: Is it the Fuyuan County Notary Office?
    Lady: What did you say?

     

    COO: Is it the Fuyuan County Notary Office there?
    Lady: Fuyuan County Notary Office..yeah. What is it?

     

    COO: I’d like to know your office hour?
    Lady: What do you want?

     

    COO: I want to have documents notarized.
    Lady: What documents you want to have them notarized?

     

    COO: Well, business license.
    Lady: You need to bring along the documents ….

     

    COO: I know the required documents and procedures. So what’s your office hour like?
    Lady: It’s 08:00 – 12:00 in the morning, 14:30 – 17:00 in the afternoon from Monday to Friday. But come tomorrow. We do not have staff available this afternoon.

     

    COO: Can I come this Sunday or Saturday?
    Lady: No. Our office does not open.

     

    COO: Your office does not open on Saturdays and Sundays?
    Lady: No. Our office does not open on Saturdays and Sundays.

     

    COO: My friend told me your office opens Sundays.
    Lady: No…

     

    COO: My friend said your office opened not long ago, on February 12. That was Sunday.
    Lady: Lady: No. Our office is closed on Sundays.

     

    COO: Ok. Thank you. I see if I will come later this week…. May I have your name?
    Lady: Gong.

     

    If any one of you would like to make verification, you may call the phone number below and look for Madam Gong or any staff there. I obtain this information from the Yunan government website.
    (http://bit.ly/wb9LZX)

     

    Contact of Fuyuan County Notary Office: Phone # (86) 874-4612154
    云南省富源县公证处 : 电话 (0874) 4612154

     

    It is highly suspicious that the notarization could be a scam and the documents date February 12, 2012 (Sunday) may highly likely be fabrication.

     

    Given that notary offices do not open on Sundays, the video taken at the office, presumably on the same date of the notarization, would therefore be an act rather than the fact, not to mention why the Mr. Hu, whose true identity becomes a question, did not also show viewers the notarization documents in the video.

     

    I would like to urge GEO to respond my last post (http://seekingalpha.co...) and explain to readers why it did not call the Fuyuan County notary office to verify why the notarization was done and concerned notarization documents were issued on February 12, 2012 (Sunday) when in fact the office is closed on Saturdays and Sundays.

     

    Everybody in one way or another has some unpleasant track record in the past. LLEN has no exception. However, we can see how LLEN evolves from its displeasing remarks into a company with great vision, precise direction, prominent strategy, focused business objective, niche market and right products, and determined management. On the other hand, GEO seems to have reasonable good track record. Likewise, its sustainability is not guaranteed. I can see how GEO disgraces itself from the series of hit-pieces against LLEN. Its reputation is deteriorated like a rotten apple with OTGDD works without factual support or verification.

     

    Is GEO Scammed Or Part of the Scam? In any event, LLEN is the Victim and GEO is a Lousy Research House!

     

    21 Feb 2012, 09:58 AM Reply Like
  • TSquared
    , contributor
    Comments (22) | Send Message
     
    Maj -

     

    If LLEN does not own the mine than what are you scared of having your team go to the mine with my team?

     

    If LLEN doesn't own the mine, and as you claim the owners are pissed off at LLEN, than wouldn't they be violent towards us and not you?

     

    If LLEN does own the mine and the management and myself are US citizens do you really think we are going to physically harm your team?

     

    The offer stands. If you want to stick to scripted movie productions that's your prerogative. Who produced that wonderful video by the way? Seems the best way would be to go onsite.

     

    Also how did you get a notary office to open on a Sunday given numerous calls say they are closed on Sunday?
    21 Feb 2012, 02:21 PM Reply Like
  • henrylim
    , contributor
    Comments (5) | Send Message
     
    Geo Team,

     

    I feel sorry for the guy you put in the videotape as he could be facing serious charges.

     

    Again, no need to repeat what Mark and Cool Watch have said. Please answer their questions.

     

    Henry Lim
    21 Feb 2012, 07:01 PM Reply Like
  • CoolWatch
    , contributor
    Comments (146) | Send Message
     
    Should I expect any response from GEO within a foreseeable future?

     

    Well, at least an answer of "yes" or "No" from the research house?
    23 Feb 2012, 11:21 AM Reply Like
  • Parker2
    , contributor
    Comments (67) | Send Message
     
    I asked questions from Geo many times and they refuse to reply if it doesn't support their thesis.

     

    I don't know of any other "research" firm who will refuse to answer relevant questions unless it goes to help them manipulate the stock price further.
    24 Feb 2012, 09:24 AM Reply Like
  • CoolWatch
    , contributor
    Comments (146) | Send Message
     
    GEOInvesting research:

     

    Have you made any verification to my finding that the notarized documents of Mr. Hu issued on February 12, 2012 are authentic?

     

    Have you been able to reach Mr. Hu to find out why the notarization was conducted on Sunday for him?

     

    Have you been able to reach the notary office to verifiy whether the office was open on February 12, 2012?
    26 Feb 2012, 01:04 AM Reply Like
  • Parker2
    , contributor
    Comments (67) | Send Message
     
    Crazy that a "research" firm will not reply questions.

     

    Any thoughts, Maj, Dan, Zou? You have a lot of holes in your story...
    28 Feb 2012, 03:41 PM Reply Like
  • CoolWatch
    , contributor
    Comments (146) | Send Message
     
    I started to ponder if GEO really had a OTGDD team in China or it just outsources the work to someone else for cost saving purpose.

     

    GEO: Do you have any quality control before, during and after DD process?
    29 Feb 2012, 09:15 AM Reply Like
  • Stark Baddiin
    , contributor
    Comments (56) | Send Message
     
    coolwatch. Wendell Chen (aka "BOB") worked out of London. if you look at his linkedin profile. They always claimed he was their china team. He is actually based in Washington DC.
    15 Mar 2012, 10:35 AM Reply Like
  • CoolWatch
    , contributor
    Comments (146) | Send Message
     
    It's been over one month now. I still have not heard any feedback from GEOInvesting about my findings of its low quality OTGDD. Is Bob still working for the research house or he ha already moved out of CHina?
    21 Mar 2012, 08:35 AM Reply Like
  • CoolWatch
    , contributor
    Comments (146) | Send Message
     
    L&L Receives Affirmation of Ownership from Former Ping Yi Owners (http://bit.ly/H1ZCXU)

     

    Letter of Affirmation (http://bit.ly/H74NHg)

     

    Ping Yi Declaration (http://bit.ly/H1ZEPs)
    30 Mar 2012, 02:09 AM Reply Like
  • CoolWatch
    , contributor
    Comments (146) | Send Message
     
    Just wonder if the affirmation should be notarized by the Fuyuan County Notary Office ..., like GEOInvesting, on this Sunday. LOL
    30 Mar 2012, 08:02 AM Reply Like
  • The GeoTeam
    , contributor
    Comments (371) | Send Message
     
    Author’s reply » more new lows today. $LLEN
    17 May 2012, 12:52 PM Reply Like
Full index of posts »
Latest Followers

StockTalks

More »
Posts by Themes
Instablogs are Seeking Alpha's free blogging platform customized for finance, with instant set up and exposure to millions of readers interested in the financial markets. Publish your own instablog in minutes.