shady business

[cbeast]

Dad found old stock certificates 1950's and some records into the early 70's. The stocks were issued by someone building a business basically out of his garage. He spent a small fortune on them because he believed in the company as a college student. He forgot about them and they were lost in his files. After doing some research I find that the company is now making $40M a year or more. I wrote to the company to determine the status of the stock certificates. I find that they were escheated by F. Lee Bailey many years ago and they are no longer valid stocks. They paid the Treasurer a fraction of what they were worth. Lesson learned: don't invest in American businesses. Scammers abound.

[1714746546]

1714746546

[1714746546]

1714746546

[1714746546]

1714746546

[Herodes]

can you sue ? talk to a lawyer ?

[Parazyd]

That's called bad luck

[cbeast]

That's called bad luck

Yeah, I didn't know that a company can just quit their public stock when they start doing well. They don't have to share in their profits at all. So I guess what Pirateat40 did is perfectly legit and done all the time by big name lawyers.

[Rob E]

He spend a small fortune on them because he believed in them and then forgot about them.    Conclusion Don't invest in american businesses. 
 

[cbeast]

He spend a small fortune on them because he believed in them and then forgot about them.    Conclusion Don't invest in american businesses. 
 

Yep. What I meant was that buying stocks is just gambling and just as shady as a casino. He invested in his own business and did pretty well without selling public stocks.

[Rob E]

well i don;t know what it was like back then i'd pretty much prefer an america of 50 years ago then to day. As most people would as the whole fuk n world would. But i don't understand if you have stocks and it is forgotten about and in that whole time there is no sign of life. .  . Maybe in the mean time they had to be renewed. . i mean if i  buy stocks and do nothing with them for 20 years or thirty years. I give no sign or response, i don't know wouldn't that be a little weird.. I don't know if they ever send letters on anything to do with these bonds.. But i can think with an idea that these bonds are somehow time related.  Not?

[JordanL]

i'd pretty much prefer an america of 50 years ago then to day. As most people would as the whole fuk n world would. 

Unless you happen to be black...

[Rob E]

I don't know at least back then they knew who was fkng them.

[cbeast]

well i don;t know what it was like back then i'd pretty much prefer an america of 50 years ago then to day. As most people would as the whole fuk n world would. But i don't understand if you have stocks and it is forgotten about and in that whole time there is no sign of life. .  . Maybe in the mean time they had to be renewed. . i mean if i  buy stocks and do nothing with them for 20 years or thirty years. I give no sign or response, i don't know wouldn't that be a little weird.. I don't know if they ever send letters on anything to do with these bonds.. But i can think with an idea that these bonds are somehow time related.  Not?

Why would you need to do anything? You are not an employee when you own stock. They do not compensate you for your time to respond to letters. Stock certificates are made to store in a portfolio in a safe. Businesses may choose to invite participation, but most people do not even look at their stock certificates until they need liquidity. In this case the process of "encheating" stock certificates allows a court to relieve you of your property for an arbitrary remunerance, which in this case was less than the original purchase price in equivalent dollars at the time. The company did not file bankruptcy, they just wanted to go back to private ownership and not share in the profits of their success with the people that invested in them.

[cbeast]

Why would you need to do anything? You are not an employee when you own stock. They do not compensate you for your time to respond to letters. Stock certificates are made to store in a portfolio in a safe. Businesses may choose to invite participation, but most people do not even look at their stock certificates until they need liquidity. In this case the process of "encheating" stock certificates allows a court to relieve you of your property for an arbitrary remunerance, which in this case was less than the original purchase price in equivalent dollars at the time. The company did not file bankruptcy, they just wanted to go back to private ownership and not share in the profits of their success with the people that invested in them.

So the company does something which is legal for them to do, and you blame the company?

I plead ignorance of the law. I will not myself make the mistake in any business knowing full well that they have no legal obligation to honor their debt. Pirateat40 and scammers everywhere, I salute you for duping people that believe that giving money in exchange for promised prosperity is in any way legally binding. I fully expect a major bitcoin exchange to simply abscond with all funds at some point and have a lawyer find some loophole to allow this with no repercussions. I expect that Bitcoinica and Pirateat40 are also completely unaccountable. I guess I would prefer going back to the day when a man's word and handshake meant something, and that gentlemen resolved their disputes with pistols.

[organofcorti]

Why would you need to do anything? You are not an employee when you own stock. They do not compensate you for your time to respond to letters. Stock certificates are made to store in a portfolio in a safe. Businesses may choose to invite participation, but most people do not even look at their stock certificates until they need liquidity. In this case the process of "encheating" stock certificates allows a court to relieve you of your property for an arbitrary remunerance, which in this case was less than the original purchase price in equivalent dollars at the time. The company did not file bankruptcy, they just wanted to go back to private ownership and not share in the profits of their success with the people that invested in them.

So the company does something which is legal for them to do, and you blame the company?

Even if whomever it is that ran the company thought it was a fine and just thing to do, you can certainly blame the company for doing something which is at best amoral, and more likely immoral. Not all business has to be immoral, although I don't see many moral businesses. Maybe the world of business doesn't suit people who are not sociopaths.

[hardcore-fs]

I really am surprised at how many gullible people there are out there.
There is 'all sorts' of legal things that can be done with bonds and stock to extricate a massive amount of profit , whilst fucking the little guy.
If you hang about the HK stock market you can see this in all its glory, it's ideal because HK is such a small market compared to others and as such you can get the lay of the land very quickly, plus it is not as highly computerized trading like the western markets.
As always  Investor beware......

[organofcorti]

Why would you need to do anything? You are not an employee when you own stock. They do not compensate you for your time to respond to letters. Stock certificates are made to store in a portfolio in a safe. Businesses may choose to invite participation, but most people do not even look at their stock certificates until they need liquidity. In this case the process of "encheating" stock certificates allows a court to relieve you of your property for an arbitrary remunerance, which in this case was less than the original purchase price in equivalent dollars at the time. The company did not file bankruptcy, they just wanted to go back to private ownership and not share in the profits of their success with the people that invested in them.

So the company does something which is legal for them to do, and you blame the company?

Even if whomever it is that ran the company thought it was a fine and just thing to do, you can certainly blame the company for doing something which is at best amoral, and more likely immoral. Not all business has to be immoral, although I don't see many moral businesses. Maybe the world of business doesn't suit people who are not sociopaths.

It's not so clear as you make it sound. I agree, companies shouldn't do things which we might consider immoral. Yet, if their competitors are doing it, they may have to choose between doing the same or going out of business.

I agree. If you're the "dog eat dog" type has no problem increasing business profitability and if you can ignore the negative effects of your business practices on your investors or customers when you are legally able to, then you'll probably do well. OTOH, if you're not the "dog eat dog" type then your business might not have the killer instinct it needs to survive.

But just because it's surivival of your business doesn't make it moral to climb over the bodies of your former investors first.

[hardcore-fs]

LOL... don't EVER invest in the HK stock market... morality does not come into it.

Maybe you need to realize that Stock is NOT an investment... it is a re-distribution of wealth, similar to the food chain.

[organofcorti]

LOL... don't EVER invest in the HK stock market... morality does not come into it.

Maybe you need to realize that Stock is NOT an investment... it is a re-distribution of wealth, similar to the food chain.

Businesses often aren't moral. That's the whole point.

[niko]

i'd pretty much prefer an america of 50 years ago then to day. As most people would as the whole fuk n world would. 

Unless you happen to be black...

Or Vietnamese...