Register for free to join our community of investors and share your ideas. You will also get access to streaming quotes, interactive charts, trades, portfolio, live options flow and more tools.
Register for free to join our community of investors and share your ideas. You will also get access to streaming quotes, interactive charts, trades, portfolio, live options flow and more tools.
I see he started posting around 4/7/10. That was WEEKS after that news article. I missed it on here. Look at the chart for Solu. It seems that "big run" ran about the time he started posting. .11 and then .08 for a few weeks, while the purchasers of .02 or lower sold. Only can assume they sold because the price is falling. You have to wait until 5/11 to see if it was shorted. Never chase or running stock. Never buy a stock at its highs.
He should have read this way back on 3/18/10:
The Obama administration has said that it may require automakers to install “smart pedals” on all new cars. This kind of system — already used in BMWs, Chryslers, Volkswagens and some of the newest Toyotas — deactivates the car’s accelerator when the brake pedal is pressed so that the car can stop safely even if its throttle sticks open.
The idea is to prevent the kind of sudden acceleration that has recently led to the recall of millions of Toyotas. Federal safety regulators have received complaints asserting that this problem has caused accidents resulting in 52 deaths in Toyotas since 2000. Smart pedals might help prevent more such accidents if the cause of unintended acceleration turns out to be some vehicle defect.
But based on my experience in the 1980s helping investigate unintended acceleration in the Audi 5000, I suspect that smart pedals cannot solve the problem. The trouble, unbelievable as it may seem, is that sudden acceleration is very often caused by drivers who press the gas pedal when they intend to press the brake.
From the mid-1980s until 2000, thousands of incidents of sudden acceleration were reported in all makes and models of cars (and buses, tractors and golf carts). Then, as now, the incidents were relatively rare among car crashes generally, but they were nevertheless frequent and dangerous enough to upset automakers, drivers and the news media.
I looked into more than 150 cases of unintended acceleration in the 1980s, many of which became the subject of lawsuits against automakers. In those days, Audi, like Toyota today, received by far the most complaints. (I testified in court for Audi on many occasions. I have not worked for Toyota on unintended acceleration, though I did consult for the company seven years ago on another matter.)
In these cases, the problem typically happened when the driver first got into the car and started it. After turning on the ignition, the driver would intend to press lightly on the brake pedal while shifting from park to drive (or reverse), and suddenly the car would leap forward (or backward). Drivers said that continued pressing on the brake would not stop the car; it would keep going until it crashed. Drivers believed that something had gone wrong in the acceleration system, and that the brakes had failed.
But when engineers examined these vehicles post-crash, they found nothing that could account for what the drivers had reported. The trouble occurred in cars small and large, cheap and expensive, with and without cruise control or electronic engine controls, and with carburetors, fuel injection and even diesel engines. The only thing they had in common was an automatic transmission. An investigation by the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration found no electro-mechanical defects to explain the problem. Nor did similar government studies in Canada and Japan or any number of private studies.
In the Toyota situation today, some have suggested that unintended acceleration has been caused by floor mats or sticking throttles, but there is considerable doubt about these explanations, and the search for the smoking gun continues. One thought is that computerized engine management systems or electronic controls may be to blame. And so it is interesting to note that unintended acceleration in the 1980s happened before the arrival of drive-by-wire controls and computerized engine-management systems.
Back then, many of us who worked in fields like ergonomics, human performance and psychology suspected that these unintended-acceleration events might have a human component. We noticed that the complaints were far more frequent among older drivers (in a General Motors study, 60-to-70-year-olds had about six times the rate of complaints as 20-to-30-year-olds), drivers who had little experience with the specific car involved (parking-lot attendants, car-wash workers, rental-car patrons) and people of relatively short stature.
Several researchers hypothesized how a driver, intending to apply the brake pedal to keep the car from creeping, would occasionally press the accelerator instead. Then, surprised that the car moved so much, he would try pressing harder. Of course, if his right foot was actually on the accelerator, the throttle would open and the car would move faster. This would then lead the driver to press the “brake” harder still, and to bring about even more acceleration. Eventually, the car would be at full throttle, until it crashed. The driver’s foot would be all the way to the floor, giving him the impression that the brakes had failed.
In the cases that went to court, jurors naturally asked, why would a driver with decades of driving experience suddenly mistake the accelerator for the brake? And why would the episode last so long — often 6 to 10 seconds or more? Wouldn’t that be ample time to shut off the ignition, shift to neutral or engage the parking brake?
First, in these situations, the driver does not really confuse the accelerator and the brake. Rather, the limbs do not do exactly what the brain tells them to. Noisy neuromuscular processes intervene to make the action slightly different from the one intended. The driver intends to press the brake, but once in a while these neuromuscular processes cause the foot to deviate from the intended trajectory — just as a basketball player who makes 90 percent of his free throws sometimes misses the hoop. This effect would be enhanced by the driver being slightly misaligned in the seat when he first gets in the car.
The answer to the second question is that, when a car accelerates unexpectedly, the driver often panics, and just presses the brake harder and harder. Drivers typically do not shut off the ignition, shift to neutral or apply the parking brake.
In 1989, the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration concluded that the incidents of unintended acceleration by the Audi 5000 were mostly caused by this kind of pedal error — not some electro-mechanical defect in the vehicle. To fix the problem, Audi designed something called an automatic shift lock, which, when the car is being started, keeps the transmission in park unless and until the brake pedal is depressed. If the driver should press the accelerator instead of the brake, the vehicle remains safely in park.
(In a car with a manual transmission, a driver is naturally prevented from making a simple pedal error, because even if his right foot goes to the accelerator instead of the brake, the car still will not move unless he also intentionally lifts his left foot from the clutch.)
Audi ultimately gave the world’s other automakers the rights to the patent on the automatic shift lock and by the mid-1990s virtually all new cars had adopted the feature or some variant of it. Incidents of sudden acceleration when people started their cars dropped sharply. The shift lock not only made people safer but also provided evidence for the hypothesis that most of the problems had been caused by driver error.
Yet the automatic shift lock did not entirely do away with sudden acceleration incidents — as the Toyota problems illustrate. The fix now championed by the Obama administration could work in situations in which there is an actual vehicle defect. It would tell the car that if it receives signals to both accelerate and brake, the accelerator should go dead so that the brake alone will work.
But this smart-pedal system can be of no use if the driver is simply pressing the accelerator and not touching the brake. The unintended acceleration — and the crash — would still occur.
What the smart pedal may do, however, is finally give us a sense of whether sudden acceleration tends to stem from operator error. If the reports of acceleration continue (and the smart pedals work properly), then there will be nothing and no one left to blame but the driver.
You better read this first. Looks like a scam.
Lenco Mobile links up with recidivist SEC offender
by JUSTIN MCLACHLAN with CHRIS CAREY
Using its stock as currency, Lenco Mobile Inc. (Pink Sheets: LNCM.PK) has spent the past few years snapping up cell phone and Internet marketing companies.
Lenco's share price has risen with the acquisitions, hitting a new high of $6.05 on Friday. The company now has a market capitalization of $389 million, and is seeking a listing on the NASDAQ exchange.
But a Sharesleuth investigation has found that at least two of the businesses that Lenco acquired - for 8.5 million shares and other consideration - were connected to Michael Wayne Crow, the subject of two previous Securities and Exchange Commission cases.
In November 2008, a federal judge found that Crow secretly controlled a securities firm called Duncan Capital LLC, unlawfully collecting millions of dollars in commissions while violating broker-dealer registration and reporting provisions. Crow was ordered to disgorge those earnings, with interest, and pay a $250,000 fine.
He had previously settled another SEC case alleging that he engaged in insider trading as chief executive of a public company, and also filed false financial reports.
Although one of Lenco's SEC filings mentions a "Michael Crow,'' the company has not disclosed that he is the same Michael Crow who has been barred from serving as an officer or director of any public company, or from associating with any broker, dealer or investment advisor.
Crow filed for personal bankruptcy in California last month, listing $30,000 in assets and $11.5 million in debts, including $7.25 million owed to the SEC. In that filing, he said that one of the companies that Lenco purchased, for millions of dollars in stock, never had any business operations.
Sharesleuth found that a third business that Lenco acquired is connected to Thomas C. Ronk, a former stockbroker with a history of disciplinary actions by the National Association of Securities Dealers (now FINRA).
Ronk operates several investment web sites, including BuyIns.net, which purport to identify companies whose stocks have been targeted by illegal "naked shorting'' and are poised for price jumps.
He also is partners with former SEC Chairman Harvey L. Pitt in RegSho.com, a site created to help short sellers locate shares to borrow so that they can remain in compliance with market rules.
THE COMPANY
Lenco describes itself as a mobile marketing solutions company with operations in the United States and South Africa.
It said in its most recent SEC filing that it had revenue of $8.7 million for the first nine months of 2009, compared with just over $2 million in the same period of 2008. Lenco posted a loss of $205,195 through Sept. 30, 2009, versus a profit of $343,299 a year earlier.
Lenco operates from a cluster of offices near the ocean in Santa Barbara, Calif. Its headquarters is a street-level storefront that holds just a few desks. There are two signs on the building, one for Lenco and another for AdMax Media, a Lenco subsidiary.
Lenco also rents several small, windowless offices around the corner from its headquarters, and pays $3,000 a month for a condominium in a residential complex just north of Santa Barbara's downtown core.
Before moving to Santa Barbara, Lenco used a residential address in San Diego that has appeared in SEC filings as the headquarters for a slew of shell companies. The people behind most of those companies are a South African financier named Zirk Engelbrecht and a former beauty queen named Angelique deMaison, who was one of the top six finalists in the 2005 Miss USA pageant. Both are significant Lenco shareholders.
Lenco (known previously as Sovereign Wealth Corp.) was one of those shells. It got into its current line of business in February 2008, acquiring a South Africa-based business called Digital Vouchers (Pty) Ltd.
Michael Levinsohn, the founder of Digital Vouchers, took over as chief executive, and Lenco borrowed $1 million from another entity he controlled. According to SEC filings, that debt was later repaid with 10 million shares of stock, worth more than $60 million at current market prices.
Lenco acquired another of Levinsohn's South African companies, a mobile advertising business called Multimedia Solutions, in August 2008. He now is Lenco's biggest shareholder, with 22.4 million shares, or nearly 35 percent of the total outstanding.
Levinsohn told Sharesleuth that because Lenco has a registration pending with the SEC, he was legally prohibited from responding to our questions about the company, its involvement with Michael Crow and the valuation of the businesses it bought. He added, though, that a law firm advised Lenco on "all matters related to acquisitions and the regulatory environment."
"I am comfortable that we have dealt with our acquisitions in a professional and transparent manner,'' he said in an email to Sharesleuth.
(Disclosure: No one associated with Sharesleuth has any investment position, short or long, in Lenco Mobile)
CELLCARD
In June 2008, Lenco bought what it described as undeveloped technology from a California company called eAccounts Inc., paying with 10 million shares.
Lenco says on its web site that the CellCard technology it acquired included "an advanced compression technology platform that enables marketers to instantly convert and deliver any existing TV, print, radio or web advertisement so that it can be viewed on most mobile handsets." It says CellCard also has an application that allows people to make secure credit card or debit card payments over their cell phones.
Lenco's purchase agreement for eAccounts Inc. and its CellCard technology identified that company's president and sole shareholder as Matthew Pirvul, of Oceanside, Calif.
But Sharesleuth noted that CellCard's Internet domain registration listed the contact person as Thomas Ronk.
Sharesleuth also found that Ronk filed a trademark application for the CellCard name and logo in April 2008 - two months before Lenco acquired the company - listing himself as their owner.
The status of Lenco's CellCard and Digital Vouchers units is unclear. Although Lenco Mobile has links to both of those businesses on its web site, they return error messages, indicating the sites are not accessible to clients or to the general public.
THE BUSINESSES
Some of Lenco's businesses engage in domaining - the practice of parking highly trafficked Internet domains and filling their pages with ads. Others use Internet sites to gather names, email addresses and other information valuable to marketers.
Lenco's two major acquisitions last year were Eden Marketing LLC and the online marketing unit of Superfly Advertising Inc. (Pink Sheets: SPFL.PK).
Lenco acquired Eden in May 2009 for 3.5 million shares, which the company valued at more than $8.2 million. In an SEC filing, Lenco said it bought the company for its domain names and its consumer gift-card business, which had the rights to market a U.S.-based program for charities to accept donations of unused gift cards and tap the balances.
Nevada business filings show that Eden was incorporated there just a few months prior to the deal. Those filings list its managing member as MC2 Squared Inc., and its managers as Michael Crow and Michelle Wasserman.
Crow said in his bankruptcy filing that he was chief executive of MC2 Squared. He also said that Eden was one of a handful of limited liability companies he created to develop new business ideas with different partners. He noted that only one of them - not Eden - ever had any operations, and that it was discontinued at a loss.
The list of assets did not include any shares of Lenco stock.
ADMAX MEDIA
Lenco announced last February that it was buying the online marketing unit of Superfly Advertising for 5 million shares, a $625,000 convertible note and just over 200,000 warrants. Lenco said it got more than 1,200 unique URLs, customer databases and contracts and a call center in Costa Rica. As part of the transaction, Lenco also assumed some of Superfly's debts. It said in an SEC filing that it issued over $2 million in convertible notes and almost 645,000 warrants to seven of Superfly's creditors.
SEC filings show that Crow and other entities connected with him were the biggest shareholders of Superfly at the time of the deal.
Superfly's headquarters address in New York City also was home to many of Crow's companies, including Duncan Capital Group LLC, one of the defendants in his most recent SEC case.
Lenco turned the businesses that it bought from Superfly into AdMax Media, a subsidiary that promises enhanced online and mobile ad delivery through proprietary technology.
AdMax shares a building with Lenco in Santa Barbara.
PREVIOUS PROBLEMS
SEC filings show that Superfly had purchased the businesses just five weeks earlier from Commerce Planet Inc. (Pink Sheets: CPNE.PK), which was facing a Federal Trade Commission investigation into complaints of deceptive business practices.
The FTC ultimately sued the company and two of its executives, alleging that many of the people who signed up for its "free" Internet auction kits wound up paying $59.99 for enrollment in an online supplier program. The FTC said people who discovered the unexpected charges had difficulty getting them reversed.
A California court issued a $19.7 million judgment against Commerce Planet, its chief executive, Michael Hill and Aaron Gravitz, former head of its Legacy Media division --one of the businesses acquired by Lenco.
That judgment was suspended because of the defendants' inability to pay. But the FTC negotiated a settlement that calls for them to come up with as much as $1.2 million in reparations.
Hill, who is responsible for the biggest chunk of that money, now is president of Lenco's AdMax unit. Real estate records list Hill as the owner and occupant of the condominium that the company is renting in Santa Barbara.
CROW'S PAST
Michael Crow once was president and chief executive of Wilshire Technologies Inc., a public company in Carlsbad, Calif., near San Diego. The SEC sued Crow and Wilshire's vice president, Peter Kuebler, in 1996, saying they overstated Wilshire's earnings and issued misleading press releases and financial reports. The SEC also accused Crow of insider trading, saying that he sold shares with the knowledge of the company's true financial condition, helping to avoid more than $1.2 million in losses.
Crow settled with the SEC in 1998 without admitting or denying guilt. He agreed to disgorge $1.25 million, plus $225,773 in interest. He also was barred from serving as an officer or director of a public company, or from practicing or appearing as an accountant before the SEC.
In 2007, the SEC brought a new case against him, this time for violations of its registration and reporting requirements. In the complaint, the SEC said that from November 2003 through at least December 2004, Crow secretly controlled Duncan Capital, a New York investment firm that specialized in arranging private share placements for public companies.
The SEC said that although Crow received most of the profits from Duncan Capital's activities, the firm never disclosed his involvement, or his previous run-in with regulators in Southern California. In fact, Duncan Capital explicitly stated that no one affiliated with the firm had ever been the subject of an SEC order or been enjoined by a court for investment-related activities.
After a seven-day trial in 2008, a federal judge ordered that Crow, a business partner and Duncan Capital repay "ill-gotten gains" of nearly $9 million (more than half of which was to come from Crow and entities related to him). He was also ordered to pay a $250,000 penalty.
THOMAS RONK
Ronk was a stock broker in Southern California before running afoul of regulators.
In 1999, he was fined $50,000 and suspended for 30 days by the NASD. Without admitting or denying the allegations against him, Ronk consented to the entry of findings that he participated in private securities transactions without providing prior written notification to his firm, describing the proposed deals or his role in them.
Ronk's securities registration was later revoked for failure to pay the fine.
Ronk now is proprietor of several web sites, including BuyIns.net and SqueezeTrigger.com, that purport to identify stocks that have been the subject of heavy shorting and are poised to rise in price as traders cover their positions.
Ronk has been one of the most vocal proponents of a theory that a shadowy network of hedge funds and other investors have been driving down the stock prices of U.S. companies through so-called "naked shorting'' of their shares.
Two of the companies that complained most loudly about the issue - Universal Express Inc. and Pegasus Wireless Corp. - later became the subject of SEC cases alleging that they improperly dumped vast amounts of stock on the market, undercutting their own share prices.
Corporation records and SEC filings show that Ronk and Zirk Engelbrecht, one of Lenco's founders, both have been listed as executives of an investor relations and advisory company called Aston Organization Ltd.
SEC filings also show that Ronk was once president of a public company called e-Synergies Inc., which counted Engelbrecht's wife among its largest shareholders.
Sharesleuth will keep following this story and report on what we find.
Michael Crow Bankruptcy
So is Mark guilty or NOT. It seems three companies that he has been associated with have been shorted to dealth. By the way that Pacificap was revoked from Nevada.
Don't know if it is "good" news or not. However he also was connected to PFEH in 2007. It seems the shorts were rather large. Or should we say "PIPE FINANCING". In one of their 8k, it states the following:
"Based on this conversion price, the $120,000 secured convertible notes, excluding interest, would be convertible into 240,000,000 shares of our common stock"
So with an O/S of 299,668,892, 240,000,000 were most likely PIPE financing and we sure see what they did with the PIPE financing with the shorts on this stock. By the way, I listed the shorts at the bottom.
Item 1.01 Entry in a Material Definitive Agreement.
On August 24, 2009, Pacificap Entertainment Holdings, Inc. (the “Company”) and Mark Schaftlein (the “Executive”) the Company’s sole officer and director, closed a Separation and Release Agreement (the “Agreement”) whereby the Company paid the Executive a lump sum severance benefit and the Executive resigned from his positions as an officer and director of the Company.
Pursuant to the Agreement, the Executive waived any rights or interest he may have with respect to any loans made by him to the Company or with respect to any expenses paid on behalf of the Company. In connection with the Agreement, the Executive has also agreed to release the Company, its subsidiaries and agents from any and all causes of action and demands of any kind the Executive, his heirs or assigns ever had, now have or may have, by reason of the Executive’s employment or cessation of employment with the Company.
The foregoing description of the Agreement is qualified in its entirety by reference to the Separation and Release Agreement attached as Exhibit 10.1 hereto.
Item 5.02 Departure of Directors or Certain Officers; Election of Directors; Appointment of Certain Officers; Compensatory Arrangements of Certain Officers.
Resignation of Chief Executive Officer and Director.
Effective August 24, 2009, Mr. Mark Schaftlein resigned as the Chief Executive Officer, President and Principal Financial Officer of Pacificap Entertainment Holdings, Inc. (the “Company”). Mr. Schaftlein’s resignation was not a result of any disagreements relating to the Company’s operations, policies or practices.
Appointment of Chief Executive Officer, President and Director.
Effective August 24, 2009, the board of directors of the Company appointed Ed Litwak as the Company’s Chief Executive Officer, President, Principal Financial Officer and Director.
Mr. Litwak, age 67, Mr. Litwak is a successful businessman. He recently returned as President of Pacificap Entertainment where he had served from 2004 to 2007. From 2007 until recently, Mr. Litwak has been serving as a consultant to firms in film distribution. From 1995 to 2005 he worked as President of Satellite Today, Inc. a company formed to create the satellite transmission and programming for the Company’s network, all for AT&T. From 1993 to 1995 Mr., Litwak was Chairman and CEO of Merchandise Entertainment Television (METV), a publicly traded satellite home shopping and entertainment channel. From 1989 to 1993, he was President of Worldwide Merchandising Corporation, where he created a licensing company which generated over Two Hundred Fifty Million ($250, 000,000) Dollars in sales volume for women’s accessories. Mr. Litwak has over twenty (25) years in management, marketing, sales and administration.
Family Relationships
Mr. Litwak does not have a family relationship with any of the officers or directors of the Company.
Related Party Transactions
There are no related party transactions reportable under Item 5.02 of Form 8-K and Item 404(a) of Regulation S-K.
Employment Agreement
Mr. Litwak does not have an employment agreement with the Company.
Item 9.01. Financial Statements and Exhibits.
(d) Exhibits
Exhibit No Description
10.1 Separation And Release Agreement
Short Interest Date Short Interest % Change Avg. Daily Share Volume Days to Cover Split New Issue
Oct 15, 2008 910 100.00 710,946 1.00 No No
Jul 15, 2008 0 -100.00 425,500 0.00 No No
Jun 30, 2008 13,910 -11.98 2,152,272 1.00 No No
Jun 13, 2008 15,804 0.00 100,000 1.00 No No
May 30, 2008 15,804 0.00 1,001,290 1.00 No No
May 15, 2008 15,804 0.00 1,136,363 1.00 No No
Apr 30, 2008 15,804 0.00 0 0.00 No No
Apr 15, 2008 15,804 -95.24 754,163 1.00 No No
Mar 31, 2008 331,804 0.00 460,000 1.00 No No
Mar 14, 2008 331,804 0.00 131,050 2.53 No No
Feb 29, 2008 331,804 -53.78 3,344,774 1.00 No No
Feb 15, 2008 717,804 -14.32 101,694 7.06 No No
Jan 31, 2008 837,804 44,134.64 3,043,945 1.00 No No
Jan 15, 2008 1,894 -53.51 4,089,248 1.00 No No
Dec 31, 2007 4,074 -95.80 1,443,836 1.00 No No
Dec 14, 2007 97,084 -5.44 289,164 1.00 No No
Nov 30, 2007 102,674 5,321.01 574,446 1.00 No No
Nov 15, 2007 1,894 0.00 272,695 1.00 No No
Oct 31, 2007 1,894 -83.47 702,047 1.00 No No
Oct 15, 2007 11,457 504.91 1,215,366 1.00 No No
Sept 28, 2007 1,894 0.00 3,998,450 1.00 No No
Sept 14, 2007 1,894 -98.96 433,458 1.00 No No
Aug 15, 2007 182,394 -84.03 2,979,448 1.00 No No
Jul 25, 2007 1,141,965 143,543.40 7,706,816 1.00 No No
Jun 27, 2007 795 -99.28 738,233 1.00 No No
May 24, 2007 110,357 -81.80 2,394,422 1.00 No No
Mar 26, 2007 5,000 -99.13 3,200,978 1.00 No No
Feb 27, 2007 573,178 434.82 6,647,828 1.00 No No
Jan 24, 2007 107,173 -73.43 4,418,347 1.00 No No
Well it seems Mark moved on:
NACEL Energy Announces Executive Appointments -- CEO Paul Turner, Ph.D and CFO Mark SchaftleinHighlighted Links
NACEL Energy CorporationDENVER, CO--(Marketwire - July 20, 2009) - The Board of Directors of NACEL Energy Corporation (OTCBB: NCEN) (FRANKFURT: 4FC) ("NACEL Energy") today is pleased to announce two outstanding executive appointments; Paul Turner, Ph.D incoming Chief Executive Officer, and Mark Schaftlein, incoming Chief Financial Officer.
Paul Turner earned his B.Sc. in electrical engineering (power concentration) from the University of Illinois in 1987, his M.Sc. in electrical engineering (Electric Utility Management Program) from New Mexico State University in 1991 and his Ph.D in economics (environmental and regulatory concentration) in 1997, from the University of Wyoming.
Dr. Turner was first engaged as an advisor to NACEL Energy in August 2008. During the period leading to his appointment as Chief Executive Officer, Dr. Turner played an integral role in both refining and implementing the Company's wind power facility development strategies and initiatives.
Prior to his association with NACEL Energy, Dr. Turner was most recently Managing Director of People's Energy Resources Corp. (PERC), an affiliate of Peoples Energy of Chicago, IL. During his tenure at PERC, Dr. Turner was responsible for the development of electric power generation facilities and asset acquisitions.
Dr. Turner was previously a founding principal of Cornerstone Energy Advisors, a boutique mergers and acquisition firm which provided strategic and financial advice concerning $2 billion of acquisitions and divestitures of natural gas, oil and coal-fired electric generating facilities.
In 1999-2000, Dr. Turner served as an Assistant Professor of Economics at New Mexico State University and as a consultant to the New Mexico Attorney General concerning the deregulation of electrical markets.
Mark Schaftlein joined NACEL Energy, earlier in 2009, in an advisory capacity focused upon improving the Company's management, financial and corporate structures. Mr. Schaftlein is the founder and Chief Executive Officer of Capital Consulting, Inc., a firm which for the past 8 years, has assisted public companies in the areas of capital sourcing and business strategy. In addition to NACEL Energy, Mr. Schaftlein has also previously served in officer and director capacities with other public companies including Far East Energy Corporation and SP Holdings (later Organic to Go).
From 1982 to 2000, Mr. Schaftlein held a number of management positions in the banking industry, initially with Citicorp through 1992, then Fleet Financial, National Lending Center and Westmark Group Holdings from 1995 to 2000. During his tenure at Westmark, Mr. Schaftlein served as CEO and helped it achieve $100M in corporate financing. Mr. Schaftlein earned a degree in Business Administration from Western Kentucky University in 1980.
NACEL Energy's Board of Directors, Brian M. Lavery and Murray S. Fleming, issued the following statement:
"The continued forward progress of NACEL Energy, from the time of our public offering and financing, through the ongoing development of our growing portfolio of wind power generation projects, to today's executive appointments of Paul Turner, Ph.D and Mark Schaftlein, provides compelling evidence of the soundness of our unique business model and supports our beliefs and statements of its ultimate success. We anticipate a speedy transition as Dr. Turner and Mr. Schaftlein assume their executive responsibilities as newly appointed corporate officers."
About NACEL Energy Corporation (OTCBB: NCEN)
NACEL Energy is one of the first publicly traded companies in America exclusively developing clean, renewable, utility scale, wind energy. The Company has commenced work at its Leila Lakes, Hedley Pointe, Swisher, Channing Flats and Blue Creek projects, all located in the Texas Panhandle, and currently anticipates generating 100 MW, or more, of new wind power upon their completion. In addition, the Company continues its work assessing the feasibility of wind power project opportunities in Arizona, Kansas, Illinois and the Dominican Republic.
For more information visit our website www.nacelenergy.com
NACEL Energy
The WIND POWER COMPANY™
Notice regarding Forward-Looking Statements
Statements in this press release relating to NACEL Energy's plans, strategies, economic performance and trends, projections of results of specific activities, and other statements that are not descriptions or historical facts may be forward-looking statements within the meaning of the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995, Section 27A of the Securities Act of 1933 and Section 21E of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934. Forward-looking information is subject to risks and uncertainties, and actual results could differ materially from those currently anticipated due to a number of factors, which include, but are not limited to, risk factors inherent in NACEL Energy's business. Forward-looking statements may be identified by words such as "should," "may," "will," "anticipate," "expect," "estimate," "intend" or "continue," or comparable words or phrases. This press release cautions that NACEL Energy must undertake and complete many steps in the development model before the generation of wind energy can commence. Among the numerous items which have to be completed in this regard include, without limitation, obtaining pertinent agreements and permits, construction of project facilities, satisfying financial requirements and other burdens. Interested persons are encouraged to read the SEC reports of NACEL Energy, particularly its Annual Report on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended March 31, 2009, for meaningful cautionary language disclosing why actual results may vary materially from those anticipated by management.
Contact:
NACEL Energy Shareholder Services
1-888-242-5848