A little alliteration to start the day.
I have a confession to make. I have a morbid fascination with this kind of deal.
A company incorporated in Nevada (the laws are a bit different from Delaware [as the good people at _____ are wellaware])
A stock trading on the OTC bulletin board.
A garbage barge worth of stock lurking offshore. I haven't checked the Panama address but I wouldn't be surprised to find a Panamanian lawyer acting as a nominee.
Private placements done at discounts to market price.
A slick website but meaningles revenues.
This is what the P.R. guy has to work with.
Despite the red flags they brazen on.
In a massive stroke of good fortune they get major ink in the New York Times.
And then The IPCC comes out and says:
17. Geo-engineering options, such as ocean fertilization to remove CO2 directly from the atmosphere, or blocking sunlight by bringing material into the upper atmosphere, remain largely speculative and unproven, and with the risk of unknown side-effects. Reliable cost estimates for these options have not been published.
That's gotta hurt. So knowing this is coming from the IPCC you put out press releases with headlines like "Planktos/KlimaFa Offer Market-Heartening News at Cologne."
PhysOrg says: "Ocean's twilight zone may be a key to understanding climate change."
etcGroup says: Geoengineers to Foul Galapagos Seas-Defying Climate Panel Warning
ecotalityblog says: "IPCC slams "GeoEngineering"
RealClimate has some very smart reader comments on their post titled "Thin Soup and a Thin Story"
I say: Neither long nor short am I.
The stock promoters say: Ours is not to reason why, ours is just to buy and buy.
So pity Planktos' P.R. people. On the big coverage by the NYT, the stock didn't budge.
