September 26, 2017 
 Tuesday 
 
 

Forum
Topic:
Stock exchange listing

       

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

 By bluejay

12/17/2003  5:07PM

It is appropriate now with a higher gold price, coupled with the assumption that our assets should be also valued higher, that we reestablish the Company in the eyes of the investment community.

This can be easily accomplished with the aid of putting out some responsible news releases. Currently the only visible market available to us is the U.S.lower trading tier of the OTC market called the "Pink Sheets." The Company's X-Mart is not the real world.

Speaking to local people and possibly some others is not anywhere close to the real investment community. As an example of what is possible for no expense other than the cost of the news releases for display by the Pink Sheets go to Yahoo.Com under finance and call up the symbol CFTN.PK and compare it to OSTO.PK, our symbol. In the case of CFTN which is Clifton Mining out of Utah with a developing gold and silver operation, they have volume and price activity as a result of news releases.

In the case of the Original Sixteen to One on the Pink Sheets, is just plainly looks like we are a dead issue with no headlines or reports along with a last sale of 1 cent. Many companies that are either bankrupt or out of business look this way. Who would want to invest in OSTO? This would be a resonable question for a member of the investment community to ask considering what current information is not available concerning our company.

Our X-Mart was a good idea as a transitional device but with gold higher it no longer makes sense especially when the shareholders suffer as a result of their stock price of the company remaining flat.

When the gold price advances as it has, everything gold related gets lifted. In the case of the 16:1 we didn't participate because we excused ourselves from the party just after it started. To place blame on any person or institution while keeping the company stuck in the mud away from visibility doesn't make good corporate sense. You take the bumps in the road and you go on.

If the company is denied market visibility then it is basically operating as a private company and we shouldn't expect anyone to care except those people who buy local newspapers.

The investment community is made up of the whole world. As each day passes there are more and more interested people looking to buy gold related companies. Why does the company hide from these prospective buyers while it has marketable gold in the safe.?
 By Michael Miller

06/07/2003  1:00PM

To Foolsgold, Goldmaster, Ryan Baum, Gfxgold, Rick, Lynwood Bluejay Auriferous, AuHound, Gonzo and other FORUM writers:

Your participation on our web site is greatly appreciated. When I set up the various concepts for it, the main objectives were creating a Sixteen to One mine library, an honest gold library and the means to share professional gold mining and gold related information. Also, we wanted to show our gold products for sale. The FORUM is the biggest challenge. Most gold “chat rooms” left me cold. Either people were promoting some flaky company or the chatter was goes something like this………

How do I store the gold? If we go back to the gold standard, how can I get a loaf of bread for my gold? And of course, very few investors understand the distinctions between proven, probable or inferred reserves. Few understand the distinctions between exploration companies, compared with other exploration companies or compared with the few producers of gold. Few understand the differences between patented and unpatented claims (property). Few who have been in the gold mining business for years understand a mine and company like ours. Bridging this would be my responsibility.

While these subjects are interesting, after 29 years in the gold mining business and 20 as the president and director of a gold corporation, creating a chat room for beginning gold mining 101A, is not my objective. You write well and have serious points of view, which should be of interest to the many readers who choose not to write but rather read our web site for reliable information. You writers might not know their names; however I do because of their e-mails, letters, and phone calls of enthusiastic support. Keep it up. Support from all of you has keep me going during some stressful times.

I sometimes choose not to immediately respond to your comments. I wait to see if other ideas will be presented. Sometimes I pass to avoid an erroneous perception the writer may get that I am on the defensive. I certainly never want to discourage you by striking down your thoughts. Gfxgold hit it on the head one time when he responded, “been there, done that” So, in no particular order I shall address some specific comments.

This web site is not my hobby. You are welcomed to make it your hobby. A few of my hobbies are photography, music, collecting football cards as well as other stuff, and life. I love the gold business. It is my business. It is not my hobby. I am one of those fortunate Americans who love his work. Goldmaster, your ideas were great! We thought of them, researched and analyzed them and tried them in the past. Tunneling and high-grade gold mining are very different.industries. For example, gold deposition is influenced by geologic conditions. We study it daily not just for safety and expediency but to stay in business. The nature of the ground can twist a well thought out plan in one shift. Those who succeed must recognize and respond quickly. The old mining expression “deep enough” is one of the most difficult concepts to follow in mines like ours. Instead of discouraging your creative mind, I summarized the USGS Professional Paper 172 and entered it on our web site, hoping you would read it. Then I had to enter ways for readers to find it. I hope you read it and maybe seek out more data on the Alleghany Mining District. Foolsgold, your comments resulted in the expansion of the President’s annual message and more. Through your questions, I realized that others need answers as well. Ryan, Your ideas are great. however they all have been thoroughly considered and discarded. The rights offering does not work because almost 75% of the outstanding shares are owned by twenty individuals or families, who have invested heavily over the years. That leaves 1,250 shareholders with not enough buying power to make rights offering successful. Security laws are rather strict in regard to public offerings. One of the reasons I include past directors on the web site is for interested readers to learn what high quality businessmen have guided our affairs. My introduction to the corporate world of Security Exchange Commission reporting companies began in 1983. Brian Van Camp’s bio is worth a review. While you are at it, check Lee Erdal, Charlie Brown and Dick Sorlien. These are men of international business acumen, whose positive influences are still affecting our management. The old time shareholders know their names. They have read the numerous stories written about our company. My belief is that when those who discover OAU and feel a sense to place some of their investment savings into gold, ownership in this company deserves their serious consideration. Just like the men and women I meet in business I prefer the same qualities in those who choose to become owners along side me educated in their investments, smart and ethical.

Regarding THE PLAN.
Our corporate plan, philosophy, means of achieving, notifications of impediments, etc are well established. Perhaps one significant understanding that guides my corporate actions and plans is my belief that the asset that I own (share certificates of OAU) are very valuable. I believe that our real estate contains up to four million ounces of gold. I believe that in my lifetime I can locate and mine at least one million ounces from the Alleghany properties alone. I know that much of the quartz and gold can be sold into the gold jewelry market we have created at large premiums over the spot price. I have witnessed an incredible advancement in electronic detection in our mine beginning in 1992. I believe that we are less than a $200,000 investment from building a device that will open the discovery of gold beyond imagination not only here but also throughout the world. Now, these are a few of the reasons I have chosen to resist the path of many public corporations in need of money: massive dilution via the sale of under valued treasury stock. I also believe that as all this comes into firm reality, the demand for OAU will materially increase the price of a share. HOWEVER, there is a more detailed plan to accomplish this. But you will not see it publicly displayed on our web site or in writing because it is based on sensitive proprietary information. The most knowledgeable professionals in the mining and finance business interested in building a company to compete with the bloated majors and run away from the sleazy juniors are either on board or will be once they conduct their “due diligence”. Introducing the opportunity to people with the time and means to join us is the primary issue at hand.

Friend, I just ran out of steam, and it is such a beautiful day in Alleghany. About the market or share transactions. Our current STOCK page is the fairest marketplace for OAU now and likely in the future when we once again regain SEC compliance and choose a more publicly recognized marketplace.
Here is some added insight into the last flurry of trades. WE got a call from a brokerage house whose client inherited 9000 shares of OAU. The client knew nothing about the company and wanted money. She got it. The volume took out the bids until her shares were sold. Buying and selling are very easy to do. One significant difference from other markets is the inability to short the stock without actually delivering the stock.
 By Michael Miller

03/29/2003  10:25PM

Thank you for your questions, foolsgold. Unfortunately as it happens so many times the investment group was just fishing. It is not the first time. Before I would ever tell shareholders about a potential infusion of capital, much needed capital I might add, I check the financial level and sophistication of the investor[s]. The Sixteen to One operation takes very bright, confident and liquid people to invest substantial money. Fortunately all directors and all past directors have coughed up their dollars during the hard times we have experienced. None are sellers either. All are confident in the gold resource we own and believe with a little less harrassment and a touch of luck, our collective fortunes will soar.
The only plan for acquiring the funds to sink the new shaft and do the other things stated in the recent shareholder letter is by selling treasury stock. Thereby, all the money goes to the company, of which you own and should benefit no matter if you own 1000 shares or one million shares.
I hope this clears any doubts you may have about our professional conduct and management of the business. If not, let me know. Also the Sixteen to One is truly a family of thought and action. If you have ideas on how to meet bright financially secure risk takers in one of the world's most fascinating undertakings, please tell me.
 By Foolsgold

03/29/2003  2:58PM

Questions: In May 2002 we were informed that an investment group was interested in purchasing a 20% share of our mine (yes, I am a shareholder). What happened with that "interest"? Also, if a company were to make such a purchase in future, what would be the source of the stock purchase? Would it be company shares or Board member shares or what? Would small shareholders have the opportunity to sell their shares? Would all this be communicated to shareholders in advance?
 By bluejay

01/03/2003  8:41PM

RyanBaum, you have made some good points. Unfortunately, the company is doing the best that it can considering that the California District Attorney's Association is trying to put a noose around our necks.

In seeking an original OTC or Exchange listing for the company, I do not forsee it happening until these private out-of-county attorneys are reeled in by their handlers or the newly elected District Attorney takes a responsible interest in the rights of Sierra county voters who hold shares in the mine along with the balance of the other owners.

Personally, I see ownership in the company as being a very exciting personal and financial adventure. Where else in the world can you buy into a piece of property, if you can find a seller, that is rich in gold, rich in timber, rich in spring water, rich in fresh air and rich in being an integral part of a unique community that is abundantly filled with nice, wonderful and caring people along with the beautiful Kanaka Creek that compliments it all. Sound attractive? Maybe all our governmental troubles are being orchestrated behind the scenes by some influential people who want to remove us just for those reasons.

It is because of a man by the name of Michael Miller that all these accusers will meet their match supported by a cast of directors that will not raise the white flag in their pursuit of defending the shareholder's rights. When this nuisance of a misdirected non-profit organization has finally drifted away I'm sure the company will not hesitate to list its shares in an appropriate marketplace.

RyanBaum, you are right, current circumstances do not support easy access for new buyers and especially the ease of transacting trades like it was a year ago. Until the winds of truth carry away the dark cloud of injustice hanging over the mine, I only can sympathize with you and the other shareholders that have been damaged in this degree.
 By RyanBaum

12/31/2002  1:13PM

What would it take to move up from the pink sheets to OTCBB or the AMEX? The AMEX has had a long history of hosting resource companies, many that continuously have treaded under $1.

Although the X-Mart may offer a person a way to directly participate in the trading price of OAU's shares, the transaction hassles are too much to attract new investment from current or new shareholders.

Consider how the process has changed. Last year at this time I was able to place market and limit orders through a regular brokerage account. A simple order would take less than one minute. Now if I want to buy shares I have to arrange for a cashiers cheque and send it to a PO box sight-unseen. Similarly if I want to sell shares, I have to endorse over certificates and make them negotiable without the benefit of SIPC brokerage insurance.

If OAU were still tradable through a brokerage account, I’d continue to have offers out there. Instead, I’ve requested certificates and am contemplating selling my shares since.
 By bluejay

06/15/2002  12:55AM

Management's decision to open up a book market of buy and sell orders on the website is the best they could have done following the temporary suspension of OAU, not delisting, on the old PSE. Shareholders interests are best served by participating on current bids and offers on an exchange or on the company's book market. The OTC market, especially for a stock like OAU which is usually thinly traded. does not let you participate on the bid and offer side. For example, if the OTC market is 60 cents bid and offered at a dollar you would never buy it at 60 cents or sell it at a dollar. This is because the OTC market maker sells in front of you or buys in front of you. In the opinion of some professional traders it's a scam market. On the other hand, the Canadian exchanges don't really have a market maker stepping in front of you. If you go to http://www.canada-stockwatch.com and pick a stock like G for GoldCorp the bids and offers are displayed (time delayed from 15 to 20 minutes) with size and the member bidding or offering identified. Current quotes can be accessed on a monthly basis from a quote vendor. This is visibility. You can easily check time and sales because the trading is done is one place. In the OTC market for lightly traded issues it can be a nightmare. Recently Original Sixteen to One was quoted in the pink sheets where it can still trade and what came back for a quote request was unacceptable. The market quoted back was less than a penny bid and no offer. This is no more than a license to steal stock from a potential seller unfamiliar with the X-Mart on the website. A bid was soon put in at 50 cents to keep the guy honest. I have noticed that E.TRADE is a member of the Canadian exchanges. If they are members you can enter orders and get quotes from them here in this country. As far as exposure is concerned in this country management has done a good enough job in getting the word out with limited funds but exposure on a Canadian exchange gets interest focused on OAU from the Canadians and the Europeans. That smells like potential buying interest to me. There are more private placements being done up in Canada in precious mineral stocks than people are aware of. If anyone has a question on trading volume that the Canadians do just compare trading in ABX, AEM(AGE), MDG(MNG) and PDG to name a few on the TSE to the NYSE. The currency exchange rate might be fun to figure out. Try checking your exchange rates in the paper and applying them to converted Canadian funds from U.S. funds. An advantage to listing in Canada would be, even if you are holding a U.S. stock, to be invested in Canadian funds. Canada and Australia are known by some as being natural resource currencies and if gold decides to move higher the Canadian currency will probably do better than the Dollar. As everyone is aware the company has been regulated far in excess of what a reasonable person would feel is just. If the old PSE people don't want a small historic gold company's listing with them, then so be it. That's their loss not ours. Their gripe is that the stock sells for under a buck, so what? Everything is traded in pennies today anyway. The truth of the matter is that their jobs are on the line with this foul market . Their position should be trying to list as many natural resource companies in precious metals as fast as is possible, not in delisting one of their last ones. Does anyone ever wonder what happened to the small mining companies in this country. They have been regulated out of business as well as the exchanges they traded on like the Salt Lake Mining Exchange and the Spokane Stock Exchange all in the name of investor protection. Anyone that reads the papers must know the regulators failed us with Enron and the many companies that conspired to cheat the citizens from the state California out of their hard earned money. We are all being eaten alive by inflation that doesn't exist according to the powers in charge. We can buy lotto tickets, we can go to the track and we can gamble at casinos but we are not permitted to easily invest in speculative mining ventures in this country. Most major mining companies today started out as grass roots operations with little or no regulations years ago. Our grandfathers in the mining industry were permitted to ruin the environment for the sake of supplying gold and silver to war efforts as early as the Civil War. Why do any shareholders of any mining companies have to be responsible for the clean up? Why shouldn't the government be forced to take responsibility for the after mess that they condoned through their inaction as caretakers for the environment? If, let's say, 2000 people in this country follow OAU, how many more would start following it if the stock were exposed to the Canadians and the Europeans and others via Canada? Years ago I remember when gold was trying to get to $1000 an ounce and this country's OTC markets and exchanges couldn't supply the gold stocks people wanted so the buyers invested millions through the Canadian exchanges. The market places down here were so jealous that a campaign was started to attack the Vancouver Stock Exchange. Our thinking has been moulded by the brokers that have financial interests on the exchanges and in the OTC market. The campaign called certain people crooks on the Vancouver. Sorry, we have real crooks here that like to steal money from shareholders big time. An ironic twist to the company's X-MART is that they might have more orders on the company's book than were in the specialists book in San Francisco.
 By AuHound

05/15/2002  3:27AM

FYI:

Several posts have asked why OAU is no longer traded. OAU was suspended (pending SEC approval of delisting) from trading on the Pacific Coast Exchange (PCX), along with 3 others, for not maintaining the minimum price of $1.00 a share. This requirement of nearly every US exchange is basically a very arbitrary way to limit access and make US stocks seem better than foreign stocks. If you look at the London or Sidney or CVX exchanges, you will find that a good portion of stocks are traded int the cents rather than Euros or A$ or C$.

As to the timing, it was the day before PCX switched to exclusively computerized trading. Nearly all trading was already done via computer as nearly all shares are cross listed on other exchanges with PCX acting as an after hours trading floor and, like Chicago, specializing in options not listed elsewhere on cross listed stocks.

There were only 28 stocks (including OAU) that were exclusively traded on the PCX, and these were the only remaining ones traded on the floor rather than on the current computer system. It was just simpler to suspend OAU on March 21 than bring it over to the computer system on March 22.

As to trading OAU on the Toronto Exchange. Toronto is at least accessible by net stock quote sites - but lists in C$ instead of US$. Not quite what one wants to know. It will not happen anyway as the requirements for Toronto are almost like the NYSC. That is why they changed the Vancouver Stock Exchange into the Canadian Ventures Exchange. Canada needed the equivalent of the original NASDAQ. That is about the only place OAU will currently qualify for in Canada.

As to trying to relist on the PCX, why? It is a waste of time to file suit with very limited funds (even though Pro Se is usually better done than law firm filings, something I know from experience). It would leave OAU unlisted for a very long time during litigation, and even if successful, has the problems listed in my earlier posting (the next one following).
 By AuHound

05/15/2002  2:56AM

Dear Mr. Miller:

I do not feel bad about 16 to 1 loosing it's listing on the Pacific exchange as it was never a good place to list. Not one of the stock listing services such as Yahoo Finance or AOL Quotes would access any stock listed exclusively on the Pacific Exchange, and most brokers would not track anything on it either due to higher commissions. What is the use of having it listed if the listing can not be accessed? I think one main reason for the lack of trading volume in OAU is it simply was impossible to access for most investors unless they went to your web site and found out it was actually listed. Remember that only 27 stocks (including OAU) were unique to the Pacific Exchange, not making it worthwhile for any automated quote system to access them.

Now, as to where to list. DO NOT list on a Canadian exchange. The most logical one the Canadian Ventures Exchange (CVX) is again another exchange that is not accessed by most Net stock reporting services. Much worse, it is not accessed by the majority of brokerages. When I tried to have my broker at Prudential get some CVX quotes, I was told that no broker in the SLC office had subscribed to the option of accessing CVX quotes as Prudential did not trade in CVX shares, even though they trade in most foreign exchanges. Again, what is the use of being listed on an exchange that no one can access or trade on?

NASDAQ: This was originally just a computerization of the old pink sheets. Unfortunately, they have totally forgotten their roots and have since imposed requirements almost as stringent as the NYSC. This is such a disaster to small companies they set up the "NASDAQ Small Caps" listing for companies who do not qualify (mainly because of low share prices) for main NASDAQ listings but who want to avoid the "stigma" of the NASDAQ BBS - the Bulletin Board System is really the current remaining equivalent of the old pink sheets and serves very adequately for making a market. The only real stigma is that there are no real listing requirements other than at least one broker - somewhere - makes a market in that stock, and thus it attracts companies who do not file annual reports, fraudulent companies, etc. so it is a buyer beware type of listing. As nearly every active stock trader realizes this, it just means a bit more due diligence. As long as OAU continues to meet SEC reporting requirements AND produces hard copy reports and mantains a web site, I do not see any reason for not listing on the BBS. You can try for the "Small Caps" listing part of NASDAQ, but I do not know what the requirements are - it is certainly much simpler to list on the BBS - unlike listing on "Small Caps", that can be done without any formal exchange approval.
One advantage of BBS over Canadian - all listings are fully accessible by every brokerage, traded by every broker, and listed on every Net stock reporting service. For those reasons, I would personally prefer BBS listing to the old Pacific listing.

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

 

  
 
© 2017 Original Sixteen to One Mine, Inc.
PO Box 909
Alleghany, California 95910
 

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

      Gold Sales:  


(530) 287-3540

goldsales@origsix.com
 



Design & development by
L. Kenez