Below are a handful of influential due diligence articles that helped to expose the not so honest companies ideas that have enabled us to become a top publisher of intensive research-driven content.
|Symbol||Company||Highlights||Price at time of breaking story||Halted||De-listed||Current Price|
|PUDA||Puda Coal, Inc||* The company transferred all of the U.S. shareholders interest to the Chairman and an investment firm in China.
* It appeared that U.S. shareholders only had minimal ownership of Shanxi
* Due Diligence exposed a strikingly complex ownership interest transaction histories w/r/t Shanxi Coal and Shanxi Puda Mining.
* The Company admitted its wrong doing.
* SAIC filings was main source used to prove fraud.
|YUII||Yuhe International, Inc||* OTGDD proved that the company was misappropriating funds.
* YUII never acquired 13 farms from Dajiang Enterprise Group Co., Ltd.
* Due Diligence found that the company may have misappropriated $12.1 million, misleading investors about the use of this money for the Dajiang farms acquisition.
* Company quickly admitted to wrong doing.
* The auditor resigned
|CGPI||China Redstone Group Inc||* Our OTGDD showed that CGPI did not own the land they have claimed to have owned to operate their cemetery business.
* We purchased two cemetery plots from a CGPI sales rep, proving that the company was exaggerating the sale price of its cemetery plots.
* Due Diligence uncovered that the Cemetery Business Service License of Guiyuan Cemetery had been revoked/suspended.
* Guiyuan Cemetery Company was not permitted to continue its cemetery business.
* Company eventually conceded to the facts presented by GeoInvesting.
* CFO resigned on April 22, 2011
|$3||No||Voluntarily went dark||$0.00|
|SCEI||Sino Clean Energy||* Our on-the-ground due diligence proved the company was materially exaggerating its manufacturing capacity and customer relationships.||$3.65||Yes||Yes||N/A|
|ORSX||Orsus Xelent Technologies Inc.||* Our on-the-ground due diligence proved this company essentially had no operations.||$2.28||Yes||Yes||$0.02|
|LTUS||Lotus Pharmaceuticals Inc||* Our on-the-ground due diligence indicated that the price the company paid for one of its parcels of land was significantly higher than what the land was worth.
* Redchip ignored our findings.
* We concluded that the company likely misappropriated company funds through this purchase of land.
* After indicating that on several occasions that it had sufficient capital to conduct operations, the Company is experiencing a liquidity crunch currently with an extremely low level of working capital, and will be unable to continue to spend on auditing and other professional services that are required for a public company.
|$2.02||No||Voluntarily went dark||$0.01|
|NEWN||New Energy Systems Group.||* Analysis of SAIC filings indicated several suspicious details/related party transactions regarding acquisitions.||$4.16||No||No||<$0.50|
|SBAY||Subaye Inc||* We performed on-the-ground due diligence
* Interviewed receptionist and adjacent businesses.
* Evidence supporting our view that shareholder had no claim to SBAY’s potential revenue.
* We could not locate/verify the more than 1500 employees SBAY claimed to have.
* Auditor Resigned
|LPIH||Longwei Petroleum Investment Hold Ltd||* Performed on-the-ground due diligence which revealed that LPH operations are virtually non-existent
* Wholesale petroleum business is virtually non-existent
* Inconsistencies in SEC filings
* Non-disclosed $32 million investment in a tourism business made a subsidiary, Shanxi Zhonghe Energy Conversion Co., Ltd.
* Eerie ties to Puda Coal
* We question SAT/SAIC filings disclosed by LPH on June 29, 2012 for the calendar year 2011
|LLEN||L&L Energy, Inc.||A Series of Reports Showed:
* Through due diligence, GeoInvesting uncovered evidence that appears to indicate that LLEN does not own and never acquired the Ping Yi Mine
* Recordings and Transcripts Provided Conclusive Proof that L & L Int (LLEN) Never Purchased the Ping Yi Mine
* The DaPuAn and SuTsong Mines Shutdown, Calling into Question Historical Production.
|FABU||Fab Universal Corp||* FAB issued RMB 100 million ($16.4 million) of bonds to Chinese investors through one of its VIE subsidiaries, Beijing Fab Digital Entertainment Products Co., Ltd. (“FAB Digital”), and failed to disclose this debt in its U.S. filings.
* Concrete evidence of such practice was offered.