Seeking Alpha

valueinvestor123

valueinvestor123
Send Message
View as an RSS Feed
View valueinvestor123's Comments BY TICKER:
Latest  |  Highest rated
  • Oppenheimer initiates coverage on Conn's (CONN) with an Outperform rating as the retailer's transition away from electronics to selling appliances and furniture starts to pay off on its bottom line. Though it still has a long way to go, the company could be a textbook example of a clever turnaround while once-peer RadioShack continues to founder. [View news story]
    This stock has gone from 4 to 40 in the last few years. I would say Oppenheimer is a little late to the party.
    Apr 24 07:32 AM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Why Wireless Ronin Technologies' Spike Past $4 Was Ludicrous [View article]
    RNIN is a complete joke of a stock. I remember a while back when people got real excited about it because they were doing some test with KFC which never amounted to anything. I am not surprised that Tim has heard of RNIN because like RNIN I consider Tim to be a bottomfeeder and a joke. If you had any real knowledge you would not be tweeting and trying to sell subscriptions to retail investors.
    Apr 1 01:56 PM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • A healthy dose of inflation may be the answer for a stalling economy when traditional policy tools are exhausted. According to new research by the NY Fed, the "benefits of anticipated higher inflation can be large," and as such, moving the official inflation target may spur economic activity. The notion of tolerating higher prices has come under increased scrutiny lately with some lawmakers proposing the abolition of the Fed's dual mandate.  [View news story]
    Only the wealthy use gas and food, so raise the prices high!
    Mar 28 05:10 PM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Boulder Brands: High Risk Of Covenant Breach Signals Need For Equity Raise; Critical Questions Remain Unanswered [View article]
    JeffLang: It appears as if you haven't even read the full report before throwing your two cents into your answer. The report shows that real cash flow for the entire year, after adjusting for suspicious deferred revenue amounts, and increasingly fixed patent costs, was a meager $10.8m. The entire enterprise value is $765m, so you are telling us you think at over 70x declining free cash flow (that could disappear in the next two years, you think BDBD is worth a buy?
    Mar 5 01:39 PM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Longwei Petroleum: The Most Brazen China-Based U.S. Listed RTO To Date [View article]
    You mean they don't stand by this press release from last week. In my opinion, if you find yourself on the same side of the fence as RedChip, you should move to the other side of the fence.

    TAIYUAN CITY, China, Dec. 28, 2012 /PRNewswire-Asia/ -- Longwei Petroleum Investment Holding Ltd. (NYSE MKT: LPH) ("Longwei" or the "Company"), an energy company engaged in the storage and distribution of finished petroleum products in the People's Republic of China ("PRC"), has renewed its agreement with RedChip Companies, Inc. ("RedChip") for investor relations services.

    "We've had the pleasure of working with RedChip for more than four years," said Cai Yongjun, Chairman and Chief Executive Officer of Longwei. "They have been with us since our initial entrance into the U.S. capital markets and have played a key role in our investor communication efforts. We are pleased to continue our relationship with RedChip as we enter yet another high-growth phase of our business."

    "RedChip's platform has served us well over the past four years," stated Michael Toups, Chief Financial Officer of Longwei. "More recently, we've benefited from added exposure of our story through RedChip's new television program, 'The RedChip Money Report.' We plan to use multiple platforms to continue to disseminate the Company's story to both institutional and retail investors."

    Dave Gentry, President and CEO of RedChip, stated, "With strong leadership at the helm, Longwei has grown from one facility to three since first engaging RedChip. Over the past three years, they have recorded annual sales growth of 45%, with net income rising 28% annually, earning the distinction of Forbes Asia's "Best Under A Billion" in July 2012. We believe Longwei will continue its track record of strong growth in the quarters ahead, capitalizing on the ramp-up of its Huajie facility and organic growth at the Company's two existing facilities.

    "Moving forward, we will leverage the strong capital market foundation we've helped Longwei build over the past four years," continued Mr. Gentry. "We believe our comprehensive investor communication solutions can provide the ideal platform to produce improved valuation metrics for Longwei in the months and quarters ahead."
    Jan 3 09:17 PM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • "Benchmarks are the most ferocious of competitors," writes John Standerfer, explaining why professional investing is the toughest of businesses. "They never get sick. They don't take vacation. They are always 100% invested ... most importantly, they're not aware of their own performance." [View news story]
    This is one of the dumbest things I have ever seen written. I work in the money management world and would never argue that my job (picking stocks) is harder than that of a U.S. soldier or surgeon. The reason most people do not beat the index is simple.

    1. They have too many positions. If you don't feel comfortable making something at least a 2% position, you should not own it.

    2. They are closest indexer. This means if the S&P has a weighting of say 15% to the financial sector, they have a weighting of 15% to the financial sector.

    3. They all follow the herd. Rather than think outside the box and buy spins, post bankruptcy equities etc, they flock to owning Apple, Google etc.

    If managers would have less positions, weight the portfolio not against a benchmark, but based on how they feel about particular sectors, and dig deeper for ideas rather than just buy what 30+ analysts rate as a Buy, they would find it easier to outperform.
    Aug 28 05:08 PM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • My Interview With UTStarcom's CEO And CFO [View article]
    Plaintiff Securities and Exchange Commission (the "Commission") alleges:
    SUMMARY OF ACTION
    1.
    This matter involves repeated bribe payments to foreign officials by Bay Area telecommunications company UTStarcom, Inc. ("UTSI" or "the company") in violation ofthe Foreign Corrupt Practices Act ("FCPA"). Between 2002 and 2007, UTSI paid nearly $7 million for hundreds ofoverseas trips by employees ofChinese government-controlled telecommunications companies that were customers ofUTSI, purportedly to provide customer training. In reality, the trips were entirely or primarily for sightseeing.
    2.
    During the same time period, UTSI provided other gifts and benefits to foreign government customers, including paying for them to attend executive training programs at U.S.
    COMPLAINT

    universities. UTSI also provided foreign government customers or their family members with
    work visas and purportedly hired them to work for UTSI in the U.S., when in reality they did no work for the company. UTSI also made payments to purported consultants in China and Mongolia who provided no documented services, under circumstances that showed a high probability that the payments would be used to bribe foreign government officials.
    3. The Commission seeks an order permanently enjoining UTSI from violations of the anti-bribery, books and records, and internal control provisions ofthe FCPA, and requiring UTSI to pay a civil monetary penalty.
    JURISDICTION AND VENUE
    4. This Court has jurisdiction over this action pursuant to Sections 21 (d) and 27 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 ("Exchange Act") [15 U.S.C. §§ 78u(d) and 78aa]. Defendant has, directly or indirectly, made use of the means and instrumentalities ofinterstate commerce and ofthe mails in connection with the acts, transactions, practices and courses of business alleged in this Complaint.
    5. Venue in this District is proper pursuant to Section 27 ofthe Exchange Act [15
    U.S.C. § 78aa] because Defendant maintains its headquarters and transacts business within the Northern District ofCalifornia.
    6. Intradistrict assignment to the San Francisco Division is proper pursuant to Civil
    L.R. 3-2(c) because a substantial part ofthe events or omissions that give rise to this action
    occurred in the County ofAlameda. DEFENDANT
    7. UTStarcom, Inc. is a Delaware corporation with headquarters in Alameda, California. UTSI is a global telecommunications company that designs, manufactures and sells network equipment and handsets. UTSI's common stock is registered with the Commission pursuant to Section 12(b) ofthe Exchange Act and trades on the NASDAQ Global Select Market under the symbol "UTSI." The majority ofUTSI's operations and employees are in China. UTSI operates in China primarily through its wholly-owned subsidiary UTStarcom China Co., Ltd. ("UTS-China").
    -2- COMPLAINT

    8. On May 1, 2008, in a prior action involving multiple accounting irregularities
    unrelated to the FCPA, the Commission issued an order finding that UTSI and certain ofits executives violated the corporate reporting, books and records and internal controls provisions of the federal securities laws between 2000 and 2005. Without admitting or denying the Commission's findings, UTSI agreed to cease and desist from committing such violations.
    FACTUAL ALLEGATIONS
    A. UTSI Paid for Sightseeing Trips by Employees of Chinese Government Customers Pursuant to Systems Contracts.
    9.
    Historically, China has been UTSI's most important market. Between 1995 and 2004, more than 75% ofUTSI's sales were to government-controlled municipal and provincial telecommunications companies in China. From 2004 to 2008, the company attempted several business ventures to expand outside ofChina. However, by 2008, China again became UTSI's largest market by sales.
    10.
    UTSI grew rapidly until 2004 based on UTS-China's sales ofwireless network equipment for large cities in China. The initial sales contracts for the networks were referred to as "systems contracts."
    11.
    At least by 2002, UTS-China's standard practice was to include as part ofeach systems contract a provision for UTS-China to pay for some ofthe customer's employees to attend purported training overseas at UTSI facilities after installation ofthe network.
    12.
    After network installation was complete, UTS-China told the customer to contact a particular travel agent to choose destinations for the trip and provide the list ofemployees who would participate..Most trips lasted two weeks and cost USD $5,000 per customer employee.
    13.
    UTS-China paid for the trips through the travel agent and accounted for the entire cost as a training expense. UTS-China's financial results were a component ofUTSI's consolidated financial statements.
    14.
    Between 2002 and 2007, UTSI spent nearly $7 million on approximately 225 trips for customer employees pursuant to training provisions in systems contracts.
    -3- COMPLAINT

    1 15. Very little documentation was maintained relating to the trips, and UTSI did not
    2 have adequate internal controls to detennine whether the trips were in fact for training purposes.
    3 On many ofthe trips, no training actually occurred. Instead, customer employees visited popular
    4 tourist destinations where UTSI had no facilities.
    B. UTSI Paid for Employees of Chinese Government Customers to Attend Executive Training Programs at U.S. Universities.
    6
    7 16. On at least seven occasions between 2002 and 2004, UTSI paid for executive
    8 training programs at U.S. universities that were attended by managers and other employees of
    9 government customers in China. The programs covered general management topics and were
    not specifically related to UTSI's products or business. 11 17. UTSI paid for all expenses associated with the programs, which totaled more than 12 $4 million from 2002 to 2004. The expenses included travel, tuition, room and board, field trips 13 to nearby tourist destinations, and a cash allowance ofbetween $800 and $3,000 per person. 14 UTSI accounted for the cost ofthe programs as marketing expenses.
    18. UTSI's senior management believed that the executive training programs helped 16 UTSI obtain or retain business. In late 2002, UTSI's CEO and UTSI's Executive Vice President 17 (who also served as CEO ofUTS-China) approved increasing the budget for the programs in
    1.8 2003 to provide a specific executive training program for employees ofUTSI's largest customer, 19 a Chinese government-controlled telecommunications company.
    C. UTSI Provided Employment Benefits to Customers or Their Family Members. 21 19. On at least ten occasions between 2001 and 2005, UTSI provided or offered full22 time employment with UTSI in the U.S., including salaries and other benefits, to employees of 23 government customers or their family members in China and Thailand. These offers were made 24 for the purpose of obtaining or retaining business from the customers.
    20. UTSI paid and provided benefits to at least three ofthese individuals for a period 26 oftwoyearseachas iftheywererealemployee... 27 any capacity. Phony annual perfonnance reviews were placed in personnel files for the 28
    -4- COMPLAINT

    individuals to document their employment, and UTSI improperly accounted for the payments to the individuals as employee compensation.
    21. UTSI also sponsored permanent U.S. residency applications falsely stating that these three individuals would be full-time employees ofUTSI in New Jersey. As a result, each ofthe individuals received a green card.
    D. UTSI Paid for Gifts and Entertainment Expenses of a Government Customer in Thailand.
    22.
    In 2004, as part ofits effort to expand its business outside China, UTSI submitted a bid for a sales contract to a government-controlled telecommunications company in Thailand..
    23.
    While UTSI's bid was under consideration, UTSI's general manager in Thailand spent nearly $10,000 on French wine as a gift to agents ofthe government customer, including rare bottles that cost more than $600 each. The manager also spent $13,000 for entertainment expenses for the same customer in an attempt to secure the contract.
    24.
    UTSI's former Executive Vice President and CEO ofUTS-China approved the payments. UTSI reimbursed the expenditures and accounted for them as marketing expenses.
    E. UTSI Paid Consultants to Bribe Government Officials.
    25.
    In 2005, UTSI attempted to expand its business into Mongolia. UTSI's Executive Vice President and CEO ofUTS-China at that time authorized a $1.5 million payment to a Mongolian company pursuant to a purported consulting agreement and told UTSI's Board of Directors that the $1.5 million was a license fee paid to the Mongolian government.
    26.
    UTSI did not maintain records showing what services, ifany, were actually provided under the consulting agreement. UTSI accounted for the entire $1.5 million as a license fee.
    27.
    In reality, the license fee was only $50,000. UTSI agreed to work with the Mongolian company and pay the $1.5 million because the Mongolian company had government connections. UTSI's Executive Vice President and CEO ofUTS-China knew that the $1.5 million payment was not a license fee and that the Mongolian company used a portion ofthat
    -5- COMPLAINT

    $1.5 million to make payments to at least one Mongolian government official to help UTSI obtain a favorable ruling in a dispute over its license.
    28. In early 2007, UTSI's former Executive Vice President and CEO ofUTS-China authorized a $200,000 payment to a Chinese company pursuant to a purported consulting agreement. Although the payment was accounted for as a consulting expense, no records were maintained describing what services, if any, were actually provided. In reality, it was a sham consulting company and the payment was made as part ofan effort to obtain a contract from a Chinese government customer.
    F. UTSI Later Implemented Remedial Measures to Improve FCPA Compliance.
    29. In 2006, after learning ofalleged bribe payments in Mongolia; UTSI's audit committee conducted an internal investigation into potential FCPA violations, which UTSI expanded in 2007 and 2008 to cover all ofits operations worldwide. As a result ofthe internal investigation, UTSI has adopted new FCPA-related policies and procedures, hired additional finance and internal compliance personnel, implemented stronger internal accounting controls, and conducted FCPA training at all ofits major offices around the world. UTSI's former Executive Vice President and CEO ofUTS-China, who resides in China, has not been affiliated with UTSI or its subsidiaries in any capacity since 2007.
    FIRST CLAIM FOR RELIEF
    Violations o/Section 30A o/the Exchange Act (Anti-bribery Provision o/the FCPA) [15 u.s.c. § 78dd-I]
    30.
    The Commission realleges and incorporates by reference paragraphs 1 through
    29.
    31.
    As described above, UTSI made or authorized payments in the form ofmoney,
    gifts or other things ofvalue, to foreign officials for the purpose ofinfluencing their official acts and decisions and inducing them to use their influence to assist UTSI in obtaining or retaining business. Throughout the relevant period, the recipients ofthese offers and payments were foreign officials within the meaning ofthe FCPA, and the relevant foreign telecommunications companies were instrumentalities offoreign governments within the meaning ofthe FCPA.
    -6- COMPLAINT

    32. By reason ofthe foregoing, UTSI violated the anti-bribery provision ofthe FCPA, codified as Section 30A ofthe Exchange Act [15 U.S.C. § 78dd-l].
    SECOND CLAIM FOR RELIEF
    Violations ofSection 13(b)(2)(http://bit.ly/mQvm42) ofthe Exchange Act (Books and Records) [15 Us.c. § 78m(b)(2)(http://bit.ly/mQvm42)}
    33.
    The Commission realleges and incorporates by reference paragraphs 1 through
    32.
    34.
    With respect to the offers and payments described above, UTSI failed to make
    and keep books, records and accounts which, in reasonable detail, accurately and fairly reflected its transactions and dispositions ofits assets.
    35. By reason ofthe foregoing, UTSI violated the books-and-records provision ofthe
    FCPA, codified as Section 13(b)(2)(http://bit.ly/mQvm42) ofthe Exchange Act [15 U.S.C. § 78m(b)(2)(http://bit.ly/mQvm42)]. THIRD CLAIM FOR RELIEF
    Violations ofSection 13(b)(2)(http://bit.ly/qO5GqA) ofthe Exchange Act (Internal Controls) [15 Us.c. § 78m(b)(2)(http://bit.ly/qO5GqA)}
    36. The Commission realleges and incorporates by reference paragraphs 1 through
    35.
    37.
    With respect to the offers and payments described above, UTSI failed to devise and maintain a system ofinternal accounting controls sufficient to provide reasonable assurances that: (i) transactions were executed in accordance with management's general or specific authorization; and (ii) transactions were recorded as necessary to permit preparation offinancial statements in conformity with generally accepted accounting principles or any other criteria applicable to such statements, and to maintain accountability for its assets.
    38.
    By reason ofthe foregoing, UTSI violated the internal controls provision ofthe FCPA, codified as Section 13(b)(2)(http://bit.ly/qO5GqA) ofthe Exchange Act [15 U.S.C. § 78m(b)(2)(http://bit.ly/qO5GqA)].
    PRAYER FOR RELIEF WHEREFORE, the Commission respectfully requests that this Court:
    -7- COMPLAINT

    Issue an order pennanently restraining and enjoining UTSI and its agents, servants, employees, attorneys, and all persons in active concert or participation with them who receive actual notice ofthe order by personal service or otherwise from violating, directly or indirectly, Sections 13(b)(2)(http://bit.ly/mQvm42), 13(b)(2)(http://bit.ly/qO5GqA) and 30A ofthe Exchange Act [15 U.S.C. §§ 78m(b)(2)(http://bit.ly/mQvm42), 78m(b)(2)(http://bit.ly/qO5GqA) and 78dd-l].
    11 Issue an order directing UTSI to pay a civil monetary penalty pursuant to Sections 21 (d)(3) and 32(c) ofthe Exchange Act [15 U.S.C. §§ 78u(d)(3) and 78ff(c)].
    III.
    "
    Retain jurisdiction ofthis action in accordance with the principles of equity and the Federal Rules ofCivil Procedure in order to implement and carry out the tenns ofall orders and decrees that may be entered, or to entertain any suitable application or motion for additional relief within the jurisdiction ofthis Court.
    IV. Grant such further relief as this Court may detennine to be just and necessary.
    Dated: ]k~dlliut ~, ,2009 Respectfully submitted,
    flJ/J~
    Marc J. Fagel· Michael S. Dicke Tracy L. Davis Steven D. Buchholz
    Attorneys for Plaintiff SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
    -8- COMPLAINT
    Jul 16 08:55 PM | 1 Like Like |Link to Comment
  • Patriot Coal: What A Short Squeeze Looks Like [View article]
    MarkA: Whatever you make on PCX, go out and buy yourself some perspective in life with it!
    Jul 6 09:09 AM | 2 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Patriot Coal: What A Short Squeeze Looks Like [View article]
    It is interesting to note that the bonds on PCX have not moved yet and that would really be the sign that a financing deal is near being completed. Also, please do not compare the stock market to a war. That is insulting to every veteran (I am not a veteran) who has served. Win or lose in the market, you get to come home in one piece. That is not the case in war. That is always why I hate war analogies especially in sports where the athletes seem to just throw it around because it is a rivalry game.
    Jul 5 02:51 PM | 2 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Why Chesapeake Needs To Dump CEO Aubrey McClendon [View article]
    In news to me, Aubrey may not be the biggest liar in this space:

    http://bit.ly/M1Zflo

    As the U.S. Supreme Court prepares to announce its ruling Thursday on the constitutionality of the Stolen Valor Act, questions have arisen about an oil company executive's claims about his military record.

    The act made lying about receiving military awards a federal crime.

    Herbert Williamson III has claimed to be a decorated Vietnam veteran and retired colonel from the Army Reserve.

    He declined to discuss his military record for this story, citing a federal lawsuit filed against him by a former business partner.

    “When the litigation is over, I'll be glad to supply all sorts of information, but not until then,” said Williamson, a Harvard graduate who held executive and consulting posts with numerous energy companies before moving to Kerr County.

    In sworn depositions for the lawsuit, he said he was in the Army from 1970 to 1973, rising to the rank of chief warrant officer, second class. He also claimed to have served one year in Vietnam, earning a Distinguished Flying Cross in 1971 as a scout helicopter pilot.

    But Connecticut Army National Guard records indicate he served in that state from January 1971 to August 1972, working as a communications wireman at the rank of private first class.

    “Our records don't reflect that he went to Vietnam, or that he received any decorations,” said Lt. Col. Tim Tomcho of the Connecticut Army National Guard. He noted that Williamson was honorably discharged when he moved to Maryland, where he joined the Maryland Army National Guard.

    Documentation was similarly lacking to support claims by Williamson, 63, that he was awarded a Purple Heart and served 30 years in the Army Reserve, retiring in 2003.

    “I did not find a record for Herbert Williamson having served in the Army or Army Reserve,” said Mark Edwards, media relations chief at the U.S. Army Human Resources Command.

    As a professed Vietnam veteran, Williamson has appeared at Hill Country events honoring military personnel, including one in Kimble County in 2010 where he discussed “the impact of the war experience on the development of the young men who served,” according to a news report.

    Now chairman of the board of ZaZa Energy Corp., a Texas-based oil and gas exploration and production company, he dismissed the inquiries into his military background as “a fishing expedition” by Richard Ellison, his former partner's prior attorney.

    Alleged discrepancies in Williamson's account of his military service prompted Ellison this month to file a stolen valor complaint with the FBI and a perjury complaint with District Attorney Bruce Curry.

    The Supreme Court took up the Stolen Valor Act after an appeals court overturned the conviction of Xavier Alvarez, who publicly described himself as a retired Marine and recipient of the Congressional Medal of Honor while a public official in California.

    While conceding the falsity of those claims, Alvarez said the Stolen Valor Act violates his First Amendment right to free speech. The government argued that the law falls outside First Amendment protections.

    The high court's decision is eagerly awaited by veterans groups across the country.

    “We're hoping that the Supreme Court ... decides that it's not protected speech,” said Jay Agg, AMVETS national spokesman.

    Records provided by the National Personnel Records Center indicate Williamson was in the Army only from March 12, 1971, to July 18, 1971. Those dates correspond with the period that Connecticut Army National Guard records indicate he was in basic training with the Army.

    “I'm very skeptical that he was in Vietnam at all,” Ellison said. “Maybe there's an innocent explanation. Maybe he was some kind of intelligence agent, and the Vietnam story is a cover.”

    Asked Monday about the apparent inconsistencies, Williamson said, “There are other things you are unaware of that I can't comment on.”

    His lawyer, Richard Mosty, suggested that Williamson may be unable to speak about his service because of its being classified.

    Williamson appeared in “The Complete Marquis Who's Who” in 2009 as having received a Bronze Star and Purple Heart in Vietnam in 1971.

    The publication's editor, Fred Marks, said its records indicate the information was submitted before 1993 by Williamson, who verified it in a prepublication proof.

    Williamson's name was not on lists of recipients of those medals that are maintained by private groups, but the websites say their records are incomplete.

    A corporate profile on Williamson posted last year by Toreador Resources Corp. described him as “a highly decorated Vietnam veteran and a recently retired colonel in the U.S. Army Reserve with military intelligence and civil affairs command positions.”

    From what he's seen, Ellison said, “It's not true.”
    Jun 26 08:05 PM | 1 Like Like |Link to Comment
  • ZaZa's Shares Move Higher: What You Need To Know Now [View article]
    According to the blog: This ain't hell, but you can see it from here, the Chairman of this company could be about his military background. I will post a newspaper article below as well as a link to the blog.

    KERRVILLE — As the U.S. Supreme Court prepares to announce its ruling Thursday on the constitutionality of the Stolen Valor Act, questions have arisen about an oil company executive's claims about his military record.

    The act made lying about receiving military awards a federal crime.

    Herbert Williamson III has claimed to be a decorated Vietnam veteran and retired colonel from the Army Reserve.

    He declined to discuss his military record for this story, citing a federal lawsuit filed against him by a former business partner.

    “When the litigation is over, I'll be glad to supply all sorts of information, but not until then,” said Williamson, a Harvard graduate who held executive and consulting posts with numerous energy companies before moving to Kerr County.

    In sworn depositions for the lawsuit, he said he was in the Army from 1970 to 1973, rising to the rank of chief warrant officer, second class. He also claimed to have served one year in Vietnam, earning a Distinguished Flying Cross in 1971 as a scout helicopter pilot.

    But Connecticut Army National Guard records indicate he served in that state from January 1971 to August 1972, working as a communications wireman at the rank of private first class.

    “Our records don't reflect that he went to Vietnam, or that he received any decorations,” said Lt. Col. Tim Tomcho of the Connecticut Army National Guard. He noted that Williamson was honorably discharged when he moved to Maryland, where he joined the Maryland Army National Guard.

    Documentation was similarly lacking to support claims by Williamson, 63, that he was awarded a Purple Heart and served 30 years in the Army Reserve, retiring in 2003.

    “I did not find a record for Herbert Williamson having served in the Army or Army Reserve,” said Mark Edwards, media relations chief at the U.S. Army Human Resources Command.

    As a professed Vietnam veteran, Williamson has appeared at Hill Country events honoring military personnel, including one in Kimble County in 2010 where he discussed “the impact of the war experience on the development of the young men who served,” according to a news report.

    Now chairman of the board of ZaZa Energy Corp., a Texas-based oil and gas exploration and production company, he dismissed the inquiries into his military background as “a fishing expedition” by Richard Ellison, his former partner's prior attorney.

    Alleged discrepancies in Williamson's account of his military service prompted Ellison this month to file a stolen valor complaint with the FBI and a perjury complaint with District Attorney Bruce Curry.

    The Supreme Court took up the Stolen Valor Act after an appeals court overturned the conviction of Xavier Alvarez, who publicly described himself as a retired Marine and recipient of the Congressional Medal of Honor while a public official in California.

    While conceding the falsity of those claims, Alvarez said the Stolen Valor Act violates his First Amendment right to free speech. The government argued that the law falls outside First Amendment protections.

    The high court's decision is eagerly awaited by veterans groups across the country.

    “We're hoping that the Supreme Court ... decides that it's not protected speech,” said Jay Agg, AMVETS national spokesman.

    Records provided by the National Personnel Records Center indicate Williamson was in the Army only from March 12, 1971, to July 18, 1971. Those dates correspond with the period that Connecticut Army National Guard records indicate he was in basic training with the Army.

    “I'm very skeptical that he was in Vietnam at all,” Ellison said. “Maybe there's an innocent explanation. Maybe he was some kind of intelligence agent, and the Vietnam story is a cover.”

    Asked Monday about the apparent inconsistencies, Williamson said, “There are other things you are unaware of that I can't comment on.”

    His lawyer, Richard Mosty, suggested that Williamson may be unable to speak about his service because of its being classified.

    Williamson appeared in “The Complete Marquis Who's Who” in 2009 as having received a Bronze Star and Purple Heart in Vietnam in 1971.

    The publication's editor, Fred Marks, said its records indicate the information was submitted before 1993 by Williamson, who verified it in a prepublication proof.

    Williamson's name was not on lists of recipients of those medals that are maintained by private groups, but the websites say their records are incomplete.

    A corporate profile on Williamson posted last year by Toreador Resources Corp. described him as “a highly decorated Vietnam veteran and a recently retired colonel in the U.S. Army Reserve with military intelligence and civil affairs command positions.”

    From what he's seen, Ellison said, “It's not true.”

    http://bit.ly/Op70SI
    Jun 26 07:51 PM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Groupon (GRPN) is considering increasing the price range in its IPO due to higher-than-anticipated demand from investors. An updated filing with a higher range may be filed with the SEC as early as next week, according to a Bloomberg report.  [View news story]
    Can't wait for this IPO. I have been struggling a bit to find new stocks to short!
    Oct 30 08:24 PM | 1 Like Like |Link to Comment
  • The Bottom Is in for Dex One Corp. [View article]
    I assume if you did not have CCME, this would have been your worst pick. I have to give you credit for one thing, when you picks go bad, they really go bad.
    Oct 28 09:21 PM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Sell Apple; Buy Sprint [View article]
    Glen you may want to take some time off from writing and really decide if this profession is for you. The pieces you write really seem to lack the critical thinking skills that are necessary to succeed in this industry. If you want to see what type of skills are needed and what good write-ups look like, I would suggest you get a free guest membership to Value Investors Club as well as start reading the "Ideas of the Week" from SumZero. This will help give you an idea of the type of work and thinking that goes into forming ideas. The problem for you is every article you write that is poorly thought out makes it less likely for people to want to take you on as a pupil. However, it is imperative that you find a real mentor who can teach you how to critically look at companies and analyze them. Based on your write-ups, I can tell that this has not happened for you. This comment may seem mean, but I am trying to help. Lots of people want to be analysts or fund managers, but they try to take shortcuts and they never get anywhere. You really have to commit yourself if you want to succeed and your write-ups display that you have not committed to doing the hard due diligence. Finally, stop spending time with people like David Gentry who are nothing more than used car salesmen.
    Oct 10 07:52 PM | 3 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Here's something for the Occupy Wall Street crowd to chew on: Bank of America (BAC) says it will pay Sallie Krawcheck a one-time severance package of $5.15M plus a full year's salary of $850K after being ousted from her role as head of the bank's wealth management group. The bank is also paying former president of consumer banking Joe Price a lump sum payment of $4.15M plus his entire year $850K salary. Being fired never sounded so good.  [View news story]
    This link about what BAC tried to do to a veteran tells you exactly what type of true scum they are.

    http://bit.ly/nVbyCm
    Oct 8 03:08 PM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
COMMENTS STATS
327 Comments
549 Likes