I won't comment on current management's efforts, but I can comment on what happened 5 years ago. I positioned the Company to use the technology that it had developed and tested at Canopy Growth for a pharma effort under the Texas Compassionate Use Act. That included pivoting away from Vertical Farming, rolling up Alamo CBD and applying to produce under the Texas Compassionate Use Act and apply as a Federal Producer for R&D purposes. The Governor of Texas, Gregg Abbot however, moved the goal posts at the last minute on everyone and torpedoed what we were attempting to do. Shortly there after. But what really killed the Company was when Jeff Sessions rescinded the Cole Memo in 2018. Once that happened, it was impossible to find any quality investment. The only thing available was toxic convertible debt. In 2019 I informed the BOD that the Company was insolvent and it needed to be wound up. I didn't see the point in allowing the Toxic note holders to make a killing at the expense of common shareholders. If they were going to loose, everyone needed to loose. I didn't want to see anymore folks loose money. I was then forced out of the Company by the BOD... you can follow the story from there if you like.

Most start-ups fail. When the business became insolvent due to the failed Texas application and debt conversions by Tangiers, I did the responsible thing and recommended the Company be wound up. I figured if the original investors were going to get wiped out, Tangiers might as well too. I was pushed out shortly thereafter.

I didn't keep the company going creating millions more in investor losses to date by dangling a carrot for three years.

The only value here is the tax loss carry forward for a merger candidate. Anyone thinking otherwise is a fool.

Good luck though.

Sucks when the tax burden becomes higher than the true value of the "asset" due to the parent company's stock being valued well beyond its own underlying "assets".

Surprised they didn't know the IRS implications before hand.

I'm confident they know how I feel.

I wonder if they read this board lolz..

You asked me a couple of years ago what I thought?

I'm still stuck as a guarantor on a credit account valued currently around $10K, yet the executives appear to be rewarding themselves with hefty salaries and stock options just to baby sit a shell.

You'd think I could finally be rid of this Company's liabilities huh?

Enlighten you?

At the current price of $.0003, it's likely note holders will draw on the note at their discount. That means the anti dilution conversion rate for Series A alone is probably now about 1B shares. I believe if you do the math, you will find the Company is currently insolvent and does not have enough authorized shares available to cover both its debt and Series A.

I can help you locate the disclosures in the filings that suggest as much if you like.

It was a transfer of assets as part of a divorce settlement, it had nothing to do with “child support”.

Not really sure what that has to do with the issue at hand, which is a promotion using old information to mislead investors and the public. Seems more like a weak attempt to smear.

It’s fascinating you are able to find something like that, but seemingly unable to find all the other disclosures which would easily suggest the information being promoted is no longer applicable.

It has nothing to do with today. I wrote the article. None of the company's previous plans are possible or ever came to fruition. I left the Company early last year.

Whoever is promoting that article is being disenginious and intentionally misleading.

Maybe try some of that due diligence you've been speaking of.

I was the founder of the Company, of course I know Mr. Gutshall and Dr. Coleman.

That's a question for Dr. Coleman, or Mr. Gutshall, apparently the only two people left managing the Company.

https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1572565/000149315219008562/form10-k.htm


"On August 7, 2017, after negotiations, the Company advised Vyripharm that it intended to voluntarily default on the Joint Venture Agreement and the Company wrote off the $250,000 down payment towards the Joint Venture investment and there is no further obligation by either party under the terms of the Joint Venture. The Company’s management determined that without a license to produce cannabis, the Company would not be able to fully utilize the intent of the Joint Venture partnership and the Company would be financially burdened by the ongoing Joint Venture terms. Both parties agreed that this decision would not impair either party’s ability to pursue a Joint Venture in the future, after the Company, or Alamo CBD, obtained license to produce cannabis. Should the Company voluntarily default on the Joint Venture, the agreement would terminate and neither party would have further obligation to the other.

There is no agreement anymore.

There is no relationship between the two companies anymore. The agreement defaulted. Any attempt to claim there is a relationship is false.

The Company has no patents and the prior patent pending appears to have been abandoned.

tothe,

Long time my friend. I’m no longer involved with the Company, I left the Company in March. According to filings there is close to a million dollars in convertible debt still left.

Converting debt at the Company's current market cap continues to be a problem and keeps adding supply to a market with little demand. It's a vicious cycle.

I'd like to see that dealt with before any plans are capitalized.

https://east.virtualshareholdermeeting.com/vsm/web?pvskey=INQD2019SM

According to someone who attended the meeting, 100% Series A and 68% of common stock voted in favor. If that's the case, then the proposals passed.

It's up to management to bring value now.

HOT NEWS Indoor Harvest is NOW defunct.

The Company is not defunct, but it is currently delinquent in its filings. It has a period of time to cure this delinquency however and has yet to loose its OTCQB status. It's also not a "shell Company" as has previously been cited. The Company's SEC filings clearly show considerable R&D history and the development of both intellectual property and technology tested by multiple third parties. Many of which are major players in the cannabis space.

INQD failed to file an 8K with the SEC to inform investors about the corporate change after it was confirmed he left the company. This idiot posted it on LinkedIn. I guess the uneducated idiot thinks you can just quit (as the CFO, Boardmember and only Accountant) for a public company and run away with everybody's money without any consequences.

This is an incorrect statement. An 8K was filed regarding my resignation as an Officer in March. I also stepped down from the Board in August 2017 as part of the acquisition of Alamo CBD, which was also reported to the SEC.

As the founder, I led the development of the technology and the subsequent change management effort in the acquisition of Alamo CBD. The hope had been to use the technology in Texas under the Texas Compassionate Use Program by leveraging a Joint Venture with a Texas Biotech.

Like many founders, I handed over control and management once I reached the limits of my abilities. I'm still a shareholder and very much want to see the Company and its technology succeed.

I guess the uneducated idiot thinks you can just quit (as the CFO, Boardmember and only Accountant) for a public company and run away with everybody's money without any consequences.

Nobody has run away with anything, the Company developed and owns proven technology and intellectual property. It has several development agreements in place with reputable groups and is still a pending applicant to produce cannabis in Texas. Shareholders do in fact own something.

In my experience this means INQD embezzlers are HOPING that they will be delisted and they can walk away with all the money they stole from INQD investors. Since the SEC doesn't care about small time thieves I guess they will get probably away with it.

The Company has been attempting to gain shareholder approval in order to increase the Company's authorized capitalization and give management the tools it has requested so that it can move its plans forward.

An initial disclosure was made in November 2018 about these plans and guidance was given in January 2019. A subsequent vote was held in February 2019 to obtain approval to capitalize these plans.

While shareholders overwhelmingly voted in favor of the Boards proposals, not enough beneficial shareholders (retail) voted. Thus the vote failed to gain the 2/3 requirement under Texas law. A second vote has been scheduled for June 7th 2019.

I hope shareholders participate in larger numbers this time, vote for managements proposals and ultimately make the right choice by the June 7th deadline.

I felt at the very least I should respond to Truth87321's comments as they mischaracterize the situation. I will make no further comments.

Alamo CBD is a wholly owned subsidary of the Company. Is currently 13th out of 43 pending applicants in the State.

No new developments are expected until the Texas legislature meets in 2019.

66truthfinder. I have spoken to Ashley Lu from Friar Tuck Feed. She has read your post and has denied ever having any such conversations.

Anyone is welcome to do their own due diligence on this.

Like I said, the Company only maintains a small office there and sublet the space. Everyone is remote and the servers were taken away and the data uploaded to cloud services. It was done to reduce costs, same with reducing personnel.

You're more than welcome to email the CEO, or myself if you need clarity on some activities. Ashley has nothing to do with Indoor Harvest beyond paying rent.

The reason the S-1 was withdrawn was discussed in the withdrawal notice.

Pursuant to a conversation with the Commission and our legal counsel, the Company has been requested by the Commission to withdraw the Registration Statement (which was registering securities of an “equity line” financing arrangement) due to amendments that were needed to the equity line and to the convertible promissory notes held by the holder of the equity line. The Company was planning to file a new registration statement for the equity line, however, the Company has determined at this time not to proceed with the equity line offering.

Other events along with the RW include retaining MD Global Partners, in which the CEO gave guidance the Company is working with them to explore funding options as well as other efforts.

"We have engaged MD Global to provide both financial advisory and investment banking services and he has already helped shape our approach, strategy and messaging."

https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1572565/000149315218012535/ex99-2.htm

Yes, the shop smells, they work with smelly stuff. Yes, there have been some big changes made since the new CEO came on board. The Company was in a quite period until just four days ago.

Monksdream, I remember you as a poster/investor with RVGD.

RVGD hired me mainly to try and restructure and clean up the Company for filing with SEC. I did provide investor relations point of contact for RVGD.

I alerted Peter after my review, the CEO of RVGD, that his financier was violating the new Rule 144(i) and thus was flooding the market with unregistered shares. That's how the SEC ultimately got involved I believe. Wasn't much I could do to help Peter. The damage was already done.

https://www.bizjournals.com/southflorida/stories/2009/09/21/daily69.html?t=printable

Peter was never sanction by the SEC because he never did anything wrong. But my discovery busted a major shell and PIPE ring.

From recent 10Q filing:

NOTE 5 - COMMITMENTS & CONTINGENCIES

On February 20, 2014, the Company signed a 60-month lease on a 10,000 sq. ft. office/warehouse facility and paid a deposit of $12,600. The monthly base rent is $4,200 increasing 6% every two years for the term of the lease. The property is adequate for all of the Company’s currently planned activities. On January 22, 2018, the Company entered into a 6-month sublease agreement for a portion of the 10,000 sq. ft. office/warehouse facility. The term of the sublease is February 1, 2018 through July 31, 2018 at $2,000 per month. The Company records the sublease income as a reduction of rent expense in the Consolidated Statements of Operations within general and administrative expenses.

All R&D has ceased as the HPA prototype was commercialized in the second phase with Tweed. So there was no need for the space, so it was sublet to reduce expenses. Everyone works remotely now, but the Company still maintains an office at the location.

They both have to file. One is a Director, the other a 5% holder.

elbiatcho1

I'm not sure what you're trying to allude, but it's really just math.

https://www.investopedia.com/ask/answers/05/weightedoutstandingshares.asp

Lame attempt? At the current stock price that's almost $560K worth of stock.

Canceling stock, or buying it out of the market, the net effect is the same. How many penny stock insiders have you seen do either?

Filing was late, so a 12b-25 is required regardless.

There are less shares outstanding elbiatcho1, less liabilities and less expenses.

Check the filings.

Either you do not know how to read the report or are intentionally misleading people. Oh and nice first post.. ever.

Company has both a $2M registered offering under review by SEC and debt facility with Tangiers, which continues to fund the Company. No defaults have been issued.

Report shows a reduction in liabilities, significant reduction in expenses among other things. And there are LESS shares outstanding than at the end of December 31, 2017.

12/31/17 - 25,503,678
5/15/18 - 24,987,471

We're a pending applicant in Texas, regardless of anything else.

We're 13th in line. Why this is so hard for people to understand is beyond me.

The Texas legislature is expected to expand the program in 2019 when the legislature meets, thus more than likely awarding all the remaining pending licenses.

I'm busy making sure our amendments pass. We have key legislative support, you have to have permission to quote an elected official in a news release.

https://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/texas-moving-to-ban-the-sale-of-all-cbd-products-300629385.html