Quick Take – Puda Coal fraud knows no bounds. (PUDA)

A revealing press release was issued shortly before the close of trading on the 26th of September by Chinese fraud Puda Coal, Inc. (PUDA). PUDA, which was spawned in a reverse merger with Vero Beach, FL based shell Purezza Group (PRZA) all the way back in July 2005, has been touched on before here at BuyersStrike!, as it is one of many crap companies owned by Chinese kool-aid drinker Peter Siris‘s Guerilla Capital.

PUDA, which has already been the subject of a summer long stock halt, a delisting, and a sham buyout offer, revealed that its CEO had resigned, and, by the way, forged documents which he had given to the SEC.

TAIYUAN, China, Sept. 26, 2011 /PRNewswire-Asia-FirstCall/ — On September 23, 2011, the Board of Directors of Puda Coal, Inc. (the “Company”; Other OTC: PUDA.PK) received a letter from the Company’s Chief Executive Officer (“CEO”), Liping Zhu, dated September 22, 2011. The letter states that Mr. Zhu resigns from his positions as the  Company’s CEO and as a director on the Board. The letter also states that, on August 29, 2011, Mr. Zhu provided a false letter from CITIC Trust Co. Ltd. (“CITIC”) to  the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC”) and to counsel for Ming Zhao, Chairman of Puda Coal.

Not quite three weeks prior, on the 7th of September, the company issued this press release, revealing that Chairman Ming is in hot water:

TAIYUAN, China, Sept. 7, 2011 /PRNewswire-Asia-FirstCall/ — On September 1, 2011 the staff of the United States Securities and Exchange Commission (the “SEC”) informed Ming Zhao, the Chairman of the Board of Puda Coal, Inc., through a Wells Notice confirming an August 31, 2011 telephone conversation, of the SEC staff’s intention to recommend that the SEC file a civil action in federal court against Mr. Zhao, alleging that Mr. Zhao violated   certain provisions of the federal securities laws.

So which is the bigger surprise? That the management of a reverse-merger fraud like PUDA would lie to the SEC or that the SEC is actually trying to bring a case, one in which the Chinese respondents will likely never bother to show up.

The content contained in this blog represents only the opinions of the author. The author may hold either long or short positions in securities of various companies discussed in the blog. This commentary in no way constitutes investment advice, and should never be relied on in making an investment decision, ever. This blog is not a solicitation of business: all inquiries will be ignored. The content herein is intended solely for the entertainment of the reader, and the author.


Leave a Reply